Set payout age for compulsory annuities at 80 but raise prem
-
Sheep ?Originally posted by Gazelle:such statement are only good to the sheep.
Only a Black Sheep - pretending to be a more agile Gazelle - will know how to recognise another sheep.
Sheep ?
Are you referring to the larger community of docile and subservient Singaporeans - unwilling to respond to the political and social challenges of the day and prefer to remain locked in a cycle of accepting all that this MIW Government will decide for them ?
If the larger community of docile subservient Singaporeans are seen and derided by you as 'SHEEP' - are you any better as a social reject by the main flock for being a 'Black Sheep', betraying the interest of the flock by towing the MIW line while deriding others who will question the line that you tow ? -
Originally posted by Atobe:
GCT talk kork he said he like other singaporean kiasu, that is why change to 80 year
With his own salary pegged in MILLIONS, it is easy for GCT to advocate a higher premium - which is probably [b]'PEANUTS' to him and his wife.
[/b] -
ya we are at fault, next GE remember, topple them,Originally posted by GHoST_18:think again, we are at fault partially...
because we are the people who put these people up there... -
No difference. They cannot wait already because they know they cannot live past that ages. Give more money to them earlier before you died.
-
year after year, promises to help the people were failed, ill though plans at the expense of the citizens implemented against much rejection, monies were wasted on useless things/purchases that yielded no returns, with the FT policies where it open the flood gates without proper screening and made singapore a stepping stone for foreigners to waste our resource, when increases in public service and monopolistic companies ran by their own folk rake up extreme levels of profit, where salaries are increased for world most well paid ministers, tax and cost increases were consistently passed onto the people when the times are hard, or when public service are privatized to avoid any blame, when the whole economy is controlled and managed by 1 family and the top positions reserved for the inner circle, where government intervention in the market is to ensure the GLCs/employers benefit, where the voice of the people are silenced and feedback is just a wayang exercise and where the "leaders" have grown complacent from the absolute power they hold over everyone and the ruling elites have been disengaged from the grounds that they do not understand the impact of their decisions nor do they care and then finally hearing all the lame excuses of increasing everything in the name of a) corruption b) maintain basic service c) in the event of increasing oil/elecrticity/water/labour/put in the favourite excuse of the month.
After all these years. Its hard to believe anything that comes from any one of our "leaders". -
..so.. what? Reduce to 80, but jack up premiums... might as well don't bother!
Every move they make, is tied to money... & always our money...!!!
How long are people here going to keep taking their nonsenses??? Look at how far back the reitrement age has been pushed!! Next thing you know, they'd have pushed it to 90-95-100... & declare that they are confident Singaporeans can live up to 100 before Drawing out their money...
Basically, all I can see is that they are delaying PAY OUT of our money!
And up till today, they have still not shown ANY proof tha MOST Singaporeans can live up to 80 & above... just their words against ours... always their words... promises that in the end needs additional tweakings to try to make it work, which always comes down to...? Our money...
What the fark are they good at besides leeching us dry? -
Anyone ever wonder why it has to be a a COMPULSORY annuities scheme?
That's because if it isn't, no one will take it up and it will be a failure. Why none will take it up? Cause it is stupid and won't solve the ageing problem none CPF deficit problem that we are facing. the government just passing the problem back us and let us deal with it instead of coming up with ways to solve. Why do we need the government to tell us what we need to do with our money to solve something when in the end, the problem is still solve using our own money?
If annuities is the way to go and would solve the problem, why make it COMPULSORY? Why bother about changing the age when it is COMPULSORY? It is not as if we had a say. And if they make the annuities very attractive, beneficial, festiable and non-COMPULSORY, do you think the public is stupid not to want it? -
Originally posted by EarlNeo:
I don't believe, that it is the Aging Problem they're concerned about ... they are more concerned about protecting their pockets, & absolving themselves from the financial repsonsibility of PAYING OUT to aging & ill citizens...!!!
Anyone ever wonder why it has to be a a [b]COMPULSORY annuities scheme?
That's because if it isn't, no one will take it up and it will be a failure. Why none will take it up? Cause it is stupid and won't solve the ageing problem none CPF deficit problem that we are facing. the government just passing the problem back us and let us deal with it instead of coming up with ways to solve. Why do we need the government to tell us what we need to do with our money to solve something when in the end, the problem is still solve using our own money?
If annuities is the way to go and would solve the problem, why make it COMPULSORY? Why bother about changing the age when it is COMPULSORY? It is not as if we had a say. And if they make the annuities very attractive, beneficial, festiable and non-COMPULSORY, do you think the public is stupid not to want it?[/b]
Why the hell do people bother to vote them in term after term..??? After election they make us all eat sh|t for 5 farking years... -
again you are mental masturbating yourself to believe that Singapore government is broke, greedy and desperately need the money for themselves.Originally posted by HyperFocal:I don't believe, that it is the Aging Problem they're concerned about ... they are more concerned about protecting their pockets, & absolving themselves from the financial repsonsibility of PAYING OUT to aging & ill citizens...!!!
Why the hell do people bother to vote them in term after term..??? After election they make us all eat sh|t for 5 farking years...
a statement which is only good for the sheep in this forum. -
or are you implying the vast majority of ppl here mental?Originally posted by Gazelle:again you are mental masturbating yourself to believe that Singapore government is broke, greedy and desperately need the money for themselves.
a statement which is only good for the sheep in this forum. -
whether government is broke is one thing, I find that this gahmen always come out with unpopular policy, make the citizens angry, what is the reason behind, there must have hidden agenda, or is it the gahmen run out of ideas so they come out with fancy things to justify their million dollar pay, I damn fed up see their face on TV, esp yesterday GCT appeared and talk cok abt the annuity, If they care for the ppl, pls dont suck so much, if u think your pay is less than that of private sector, then go join private sector and resign from PApOriginally posted by Gazelle:again you are mental masturbating yourself to believe that Singapore government is broke, greedy and desperately need the money for themselves.
a statement which is only good for the sheep in this forum. -
Actually, just let them come with their UNPOPULAR POLICIES...Originally posted by t_a_s:whether government is broke is one thing, I find that this gahmen always come out with unpopular policy, make the citizens angry, what is the reason behind, there must have hidden agenda, or is it the gahmen run out of ideas so they come out with fancy things to justify their million dollar pay, I damn fed up see their face on TV, esp yesterday GCT appeared and talk cok abt the annuity, If they care for the ppl, pls dont suck so much, if u think your pay is less than that of private sector, then go join private sector and resign from PAp
they are paving their way OUT of election some day... -
It is difficult when they control the media... to kick them out, we have to support Dr Chee's cause and give him 100% of our support until his aims to make Singapore transparent and his effort to disgrace the despots internationally bites.
-
Don't forget also that they are persecuting those that are credible candidates for the opposition.... there is no other way. People, support Dr Chee's cause and kick out a couple of ministers with papa's boy the best candidate to eliminate if we want real change.
If we can do that, the Singapore government will not dare to take the people's money and put so much into their pocket at will. -
Seems that being senior (or senile?) in this govt gives one the right to make blunt comments.
Think LKY and his Johor rants and the merger with Malaysia. Then Lee Hsien Loong and his mee siam mai hum. And now GCT with this.
May the Father, the Son and Holy Goh bless you. Amen.
Setting the payout at an earlier age will certainly necessitate a raise in premiums. This is because:
1) higher ratio of citizens live beyond 80 than 85
2) Since payout is earlier, there is lesser time for the annuity pool to gather more market investment returns
However, such statements would only serve to cement this govt's mercenary image. More tact would have been better. -
Just dont implement it, the ppl above 85 now got any problem until the gahmen cant help them, by giving the old $260 per month, the minister cant tahan???
-
80 still too high for lots of the people, i think 70 better.Originally posted by Manager433:Set payout age for compulsory annuities at 80 but raise premiums: SM Goh
By Hoe Yeen Nie/Ting Kheng Siong, Channel NewsAsia | Posted: 21 October 2007 2144 hrs
http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/singaporelocalnews/view/306943/1/.html
Now wat??? -
This is the right age to pay out annuities - 70.Originally posted by play_n_play:80 still too high for lots of the people, i think 70 better.
The principle of life is life must be lived to the fullest and not wasted in paying annuity insurance premium for others who have good life and long life to live.
It is a meaningless life if one has to live a life to pay such insurance for the better off in society knowing one can live only till 75-80 but cannot help oneself in getting a final subsistence of life before leaving planet earth. -
hmm...http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_life_expectancy
given that they refuse to come clean and reveal the overall life expectancy breakdown, would wiki be considered reliable? -
check the wiki, singaporeans life sapan is 80 yr, why want to cheat us after 85 withdraw annuity from hellOriginally posted by SevenEleven:hmm...http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_life_expectancy
given that they refuse to come clean and reveal the overall life expectancy breakdown, would wiki be considered reliable? -
err...should be above rightOriginally posted by Lin Yu:more bull$hit
anything below 65 yrs old is unacceptable -
Come to think of it, the CPF scheme is a mess.
I have money locked up in my flat.
I have money locked up in the MediSave accout.
I have money locked up in the Special Account.
Later I will have money locked up in the Retirement Account.
The Minimum Sum Scheme.
The Annuity for Others (and Maybe, just Maybe Me) Scheme
In the end, my CPF have not enough money.
It is like having several credit cards, and having your purchase points spread out over all of them. You have points, but not enough in anyone of them to redeem anything.
The CPF scheme should go back to its basic purpose. To save for retirement.
Allow for only the purchase of a flat, thats all.
Pension should kick in at the 'official' retirement age, 62, 65 or 67.
We should not be discussing whether age 85 or 80, at all.
Medical insurance and annuities are to be bought privately, at own option.
Its your own responsibility.
Presently, some of those who have reached retirement age are caught short. That's because The CPF scheme was introduced compulsorily only in the 1970s. There are 'many' who would have significant savings if not for the various subdividing.
The future generations would have sufficient money in their CPF accounts as they would start saving as soon as they start working.
The self employed should be advised to contribute to their CPF accounts.
Those who fell through the cracks would be those who are unemployed for life, like housewives and the handicapped. These would be helped by families members in the first line, and by government welfare on the second line.
Those rich or lazy who do work and therefore do not have CPF accounts, they are on their own.
We are now embroiled in a discussion that should not have come into being, in the first place.