CPF - A Crucial Question
-
from littlespeck.com:
CPF
A crucial question
In view of massive losses in Singaporeans’ assets, will government turn to CPF for solution?
Dec 28, 2008
It is a crucial question that the highest authority in government should answer: In view of our disastrous investments, will the state turn to Central Provident Funds for help?
This is a burning doubt in many people’s minds and the authorities should no longer keep quiet as though the issue doesn’t exist.
In times of financial crisis, the political leaders should be more open about the status - and the use - of the state reserves and the people’s savings, rather than maintain a dignified silence.
Too much money is involved. Our whole future is at stake.
Merely saying ‘don’t worry our investments are for up 30 years’ is no longer enough.
There should be full public disclosures on the details, and discussions on government intentions for the future.
The latest to voice suspicions is prominent blogger, redbean who fears that the government may “keep the CPF for as long as possible to enable them a cheap source of fund for their own investment schemes.”
He added, however, “I hope I am wrong.”
Here’s how he penned his concerns, which reflected those to many Singaporeans: -
In March this year the official figure given was that Temasek was managing $185b of assets.
If these were in equity or equity related assets and stocks, my guesstimate is that it would have lost 50% of its value at least.
But the figure will be much better if kept in fixed deposits or less risky assets that are saved from the financial crisis.
If the loss is in the 50% region, I said if, the loss must be made up from somewhere.
I fear the money in CPF. Would the minimum sum and Medisave be further increased?
Would the withdrawal age be further delayed? Would there be new measures to shift the goal posts?
There are now more reasons to wish that our investments are intact, that the talented fund managers are doing well to keep them growing or at least not losing.
There are more reasons not to change the government so that the talents and the continuity will help to safeguard our assets and investments, and our future.
The CPF is like a sacred cow. It is the people's hard earned money and must rightfully return to the people for their own benefit at the earliest possible time.
Definitely not till they are dead or near death. This is simply bad.
I have all the time this bad feeling, and I can be totally wrong on this, that there are people with designs on our CPF money.
To keep the CPF for as long as possible to enable them a cheap source of fund for their own investment schemes. I hope I am wrong.
I hope the real reasons to keep the money for as long as they can is really for the good of the people, in the interests of the owners.
But should anyone really have wrongful designs, they must know that the designs are wicked and will do them no good.
The first is the intent to 'sapu' money.
No one should ever think of it as the CPF money rightly belongs to the people and depriving the people from getting it back is already sinful, if not criminal.
Decent and honourable people who believe in not doing evil should never harbour such thoughts.
The second intent to use the money for whatever schemes or things, may include thoughts of returning the gains to the people, if there are gains, may have some mitigating factors to lower the ill effects of the first intent.
But if it is just to exploit this cheap source of fund with no regards to rewarding the owner of the money, it is unforgiveable. Seeing it in any other way is still a dirty thing to do.
Do I sound like preaching or delivering a sermon? The rights and wrongs of such acts and intents are difficult to dispute or wish away.
Do not have designs on the people's hard earned money for private interests.
If there are, it is better to let the owners know and seek their permission and forgiveness. Do not temper with money that is not yours. By redbean
Comments
Anonymous said,
Obviously if the CPF or reserves are redistributed, the country will be poorer in the balance sheet.
If the assets are lost through speculations, however, the results are still the same. both ways, the country is poorer. But where it is impossible to do so in the first instance, we could have make it big with the second one. And wrote a book to teach others about it. Don’t lose sleep over this. What happened was an anomaly. Mind you, we haven’t lost any money yet.
You should be laughing your way to the bank, 100 years from now (SIC).
redbean said,
Thank god there is still hope...in a hundred years!
Kaffein said,
Indeed. I have been telling this to my friends and colleagues since 4-5 years ago. But nobody listens to me.
Told them that what makes you so sure your money won't be used for investments and all it needs is a world financial crisis and you may lose all your monies at one swipe.
My friends think I'm anti-PAP and anti-establishment. Perhaps now they may think otherwise. I told them, just think Ferdinand Marcos and Suharto, and the country is still trying to figure out where all them money has gone.
I'm not saying it is such, but if there are no independent checks, how would anyone know?
Take NKF for example, if it hadn't been for the ST slip and the arrogance of TT Durai, how would anyone know the mismanagement of the funds?
If it hadn't been for the collapse of the Lehman brothers, who would have thought they had been sold high-risk funds?
If Madoff wasn't discovered, who would have thought he had cheated so many people and smart people in business and investments?
Who would have thought the town councils had used our monies to invest and lost, and not even a word out until 2-3 months later when people demanded for an account?
Even then, the answers were dodgy and unclear.
Never say never.
Anyway, that's what CSJ (opposition leader Chee Soon Juan) pointed out publicly and he got sued.
Well now, with the recent collapse of so many financial institutions, people are waking up and starting to ask questions.
So perhaps it will be good for the government to explain in simple terms to the questions on the ground.
Anyway, they are clean so some father figure had vouched for. So there is nothing to fear. It definitely will give them a good boost in people's confidence.
Let's hope.
http://mysingaporenews.blogspot.com/2008/12/wishful-thinking-or-wicked-intent.html -
during the asian financial crisis, POSB was put under DBS bank.
-
during the asian financial crisis, POSB was put under DBS bank.
-
I feel that the general public should be educated on what is really going on behind closed doors in the govt. there is really no transparency at all, they only publish their gains in the monopolized media and hide their losses.
Every time i say something concerning the CPF, my friends who seem to be educated of it by mainstream media would disagree and think that we're fine, they have no alternate source of news, only PAP's brainwashing lies.
-
Originally posted by ivebeenhad:
I feel that the general public should be educated on what is really going on behind closed doors in the govt. there is really no transparency at all, they only publish their gains in the monopolized media and hide their losses.
Every time i say something concerning the CPF, my friends who seem to be educated of it by mainstream media would disagree and think that we're fine, they have no alternate source of news, only PAP's brainwashing lies.
You should be more concerned with your compatriots who turn up on polling day (notwithstanding - or blatantly indulging in delusional fantasies and ignoring the realities of life - the fact the outcome of the elections have already been manipulated through excessive gerrymandering) and ask "can the opposition do better?"
-
You think the population has to be increased to 6 million for fun?
-
Originally posted by charlize:
You think the population has to be increased to 6 million for fun?
Good thinking!
-
Originally posted by charlize:
You think the population has to be increased to 6 million for fun?
Leading indicator that there is a problem with Singapore..?
I think so.Sometime I really wish I can have a say on what they(Tmsk,GIC) do with Singapore;s investments...
Singaporeans are its shareholders, we have a say on what goes on with the money... -
i am a strong believer that CPF money of ours are pass on to temasek of use by GIC for further their investment pruchases.
that is how we earn our CPF interest. i do agree that and believe tat the very reason why we extending our withdrawal age has to do with the vast amount of money stuck in super long term investment and maybe lost forever.
-
From the 50s to the 60s, Unidentified Flying Objects displaying out of this world flight characteristics were witnessed by thousands.
Subsequently, the US govt funded a study to gather the 'truth' about such crafts and hopefully, its occupants, thru Brooklyns University, and led to the infamously knowned leaked 'Brooklyns Report'.
It did not lay any claims to the veracity of UFOs, but it proposed and called for a SUPPRESSION of such UFOs information and to discredit witnesses, because it would create a pyschological disorder to the masses to know that we are not alone.
Religious beliefs and scientific dogma would be shattered. Mass panic would ensue. Beings that could travel across galaxies would be highly intelligent and would certainly not come to Earth just to say hello.
The point i am trying to put across is that govts believe suppression of news or dignified silence would be in the best interest of the population, otherwise panic would only ensue and chaos would reign in our ordered societies. The masses CANNOT HANDLE THE TRUTH was the catchphrase.
As we moved into the 21st century, we all believed in freedom and seek for more transparency and openess. Witness the watergate scandals, pentagon papers on vietnam, wmds in iraq or the lack of it, etc, etc.
The masses did not panic, or most didnt, lives went on.
However, today, we witnessed the dramatic collapse of the financial market upon revelation by Lehman Bros and gang, and the effects of the philosphy 'The masses cannot handle the truth'.
The masses fled the markets with their savings and earnings. Global recession occured. Millions soon out of work and will starve to death,even when the fundamentals of earth's resources are still strong, and the capability of more reliable biz enterprises are around. Money disappeared into homes and banks.
I too will advocate for transparency of our CPF and have the intellectual capacity to handle the truth and accept the reasons for it to be held for long term social spending with returns.
Problem is, do others? Will they react as they did in the financial market, panic and withdraw the monies even if there are no losses or just paper losses in the fund's investment strategies?
And will the more ambitious but intellectually challenged and morally flawed use such opportunities to seize control of our lives, rule our economy, by blaming the govt for paper losses or insufficent paper gains? Worse still, will financial predators gleam with pleasure at such revelations of our holdings, which is yours and my future?
Do we have the mental capacity to handle the truth, from the DPM to the roadsweeper?
-
Originally posted by xtreyier:
From the 50s to the 60s, Unidentified Flying Objects displaying out of this world flight characteristics were witnessed by thousands.
Subsequently, the US govt funded a study to gather the 'truth' about such crafts and hopefully, its occupants, thru Brooklyns University, and led to the infamously knowned leaked 'Brooklyns Report'.
It did not lay any claims to the veracity of UFOs, but it proposed and called for a SUPPRESSION of such UFOs information and to discredit witnesses, because it would create a pyschological disorder to the masses to know that we are not alone.
Religious beliefs and scientific dogma would be shattered. Mass panic would ensue. Beings that could travel across galaxies would be highly intelligent and would certainly not come to Earth just to say hello.
The point i am trying to put across is that govts believe suppression of news or dignified silence would be in the best interest of the population, otherwise panic would only ensue and chaos would reign in our ordered societies. The masses CANNOT HANDLE THE TRUTH was the catchphrase.
As we moved into the 21st century, we all believed in freedom and seek for more transparency and openess. Witness the watergate scandals, pentagon papers on vietnam, wmds in iraq or the lack of it, etc, etc.
The masses did not panic, or most didnt, lives went on.
However, today, we witnessed the dramatic collapse of the financial market upon revelation by Lehman Bros and gang, and the effects of the philosphy 'The masses cannot handle the truth'.
The masses fled the markets with their savings and earnings. Global recession occured. Millions soon out of work and will starve to death,even when the fundamentals of earth's resources are still strong, and the capability of more reliable biz enterprises are around. Money disappeared into homes and banks.
I too will advocate for transparency of our CPF and have the intellectual capacity to handle the truth and accept the reasons for it to be held for long term social spending with returns.
Problem is, do others? Will they react as they did in the financial market, panic and withdraw the monies even if there are no losses or just paper losses in the fund's investment strategies?
And will the more ambitious but intellectually challenged and morally flawed use such opportunities to seize control of our lives, rule our economy, by blaming the govt for paper losses or insufficent paper gains? Worse still, will financial predators gleam with pleasure at such revelations of our holdings, which is yours and my future?
Do we have the mental capacity to handle the truth, from the DPM to the roadsweeper?
another text of craps, if things were happening beyond our comprehension like UFO, I dont see how people can panic
If your money is with someone and they used it for speculation, this is the worry and not panicking
-
Originally posted by seyKai:
another text of craps, if things were happening beyond our comprehension like UFO, I dont see how people can panic
If your money is with someone and they used it for speculation, this is the worry and not panicking
This is not meant as a reply to you, for you are mentally challenged.
This is for those who think like you.
Pray tell me what investment is not speculation? And what investment has no risks, if even pedigree'd 100 year old institutions can collapse? And how CPF can generate returns?
-
Originally posted by xtreyier:
This is not meant as a reply to you, for you are mentally challenged.
This is for those who think like you.
Pray tell me what investment is not speculation? And what investment has no risks, if even pedigree'd 100 year old institutions can collapse? And how CPF can generate returns?
Long-term investment is not speculation.....You mean you grow a tomato plant and speculate whether the tomato comes out eventually?
-
why grow a tomato plant if you have no intention to have tomatoes later? C'mon, there must be an aim before you set to action. Aim itself is a speculation on the end result.
-
Originally posted by xtreyier:
why grow a tomato plant if you have no intention to have tomatoes later? C'mon, there must be an aim before you set to action. Aim itself is a speculation on the end result.
Sorry.But I don't quite get it....
-
i dun get it either, planting tomato and hope to get oranges later?
-
I believe the only way the garment can do to stop you from withdrawing is to sell expensive HDB to you. So that this will make sure you keep working to pay thru your nose thru your CPF.
They don’t really need to raise the minimum ceiling and minimum age withdrawal anymore. Picture this, how many SG ppls will qualify to withdraw a big amount after paying almost their rest of their life for their expensive flat and still having a big amount to meet up the minimum withdrawal. Even if there is or are, these are minorities.
They have setup so many safety lines to deter the withdrawal of CPF for SG ppls until deaths or near deaths. These safety lines are not so easy to break. Only minorities will break it. So not an issue to them anymore.
-
Originally posted by 16/f/lonely:
Long-term investment is not speculation.....You mean you grow a tomato plant and speculate whether the tomato comes out eventually?
1+1 will always be equal to two. This is maths, an exact science. Anything else is pure speculation. Growing a tomato plant does not mean you will get tomatoes eventually. There are factors which affects its growth. Out of 10 tries, perhaps 9 times you will get tomatoes. The other plant turns out to be a dud.This is NOT exact sciene anymore. You will not dare to be sure. You do not have the facts to claim 100% so. Only ego and bravado, like the deluded mad prophet UncleAndrew, will claim so.
Similarly, in investments, economists have tried to turn it into exact science in predictions to minimise the element of risks, through formulas, stats and data interpretations.
But even if they get it right thru a genius, it would never be exact science. No economist will dare to claim 100%, at most 99% after running the formulas several times in a supercomputer. It is that 1% probability of error that will hurt. Alan Greenspan found that out too late.
Too many factors, known and unknown can affect growth, in almost anything. That's risk. Low risk, high risk, calculated risk, etc, are still, in the end, risk. Low term, short term, long on market, short on market, etc, etc, are risks.
But should we fear risk? No! Stepping out of your house is a risk too. Doesnt mean for the past 20 or more years, of nothing happening when you step out, doesnt mean tomorrow something wont happen. To fear risk is to hide at home, and hopefully a plane dont crash through it.
Risk is part of life. We can only minimise it as much as we can by seeking education and informed discussions. When shit happens, as it often will for there are factors that occur outside of our control, learn to get over it and most critically - to move on. To be happy or sad is a choice we can freely make daily. Live life with no regrets and never be oppressed by fear.
-
Speculation involves the buying , holding, and selling of stocks, bonds,commodities, currencies, collectibles, real estate, derivatives or any valuable financial instrument to profit from fluctuations in its price as opposed to buying it for use or for income via methods such as dividents or interest.
Get it?
Please don't bullshit and tell me all the other meanings of "speculation" because if we're talking finanace market here, this is what specualtion means in that context.
-
Originally posted by 16/f/lonely:
Speculation involves the buying , holding, and selling of stocks, bonds,commodities, currencies, collectibles, real estate, derivatives or any valuable financial instrument to profit from fluctuations in its price as opposed to buying it for use or for income via methods such as dividents or interest.
Get it?
Please don't bullshit and tell me all the other meanings of "speculation" because if we're talking finanace market here, this is what specualtion means in that context.
I bought a house for myself. I use it. After 2 years i decided to sell it. And profited by it thru a 'fluctuation' in the price. Would you say i 'speculated'?
I bought shares in Singtel instead of Keppel. I know it is a strong company and its stock value will rise in time as opposed to high energy costings ship building firms products. Am i buying it 'for income via methods such as dividents or interest' or speculating?.
By all means, live with your politically correct bullshit, a rose still smells the same by any other name, so does crap.
-
Originally posted by xtreyier:
I bought a house for myself. I use it. After 2 years i decided to sell it. And profited by it thru a 'fluctuation' in the price. Would you say i 'speculated'?
I bought shares in Singtel instead of Keppel. I know it is a strong company and its stock value will rise in time as opposed to high energy costings ship building firms products. Am i buying it 'for income via methods such as dividents or interest' or speculating?.
By all means, live with your politically correct bullshit, a rose is still a rose by any other name.
So after these examples, your point being?
-
Originally posted by 16/f/lonely:
So after these examples, your point being?
If you still fail to see my point earlier despite my efforts, and to ask me now again, then it is no point to continue. I stand by what i had said, and guess you have the right to your perceptions. It's your life. Let it be that you find comfort and safety in 'long term investment'.My only hope is that more people pull the blinkers off their eyes and be aware that all investments are risks and not be afraid of it. Better than to tell old folks of 100% safety in long term investments being guaranteed. At least they can be better informed to make a choice or no choices if they are to seek returns. There is no free lunch
-
Originally posted by xtreyier:
If you still fail to see my point earlier despite my efforts, and to ask me now again, then it is no point to continue. I stand by what i had said, and guess you have the right to your perceptions. It's your life. Let it be that you find comfort and safety in 'long term investment'.My only hope is that more people pull the blinkers off their eyes and be aware that all investments are risks and not be afraid of it. Better than to tell old folks of 100% safety in long term investments being guaranteed. At least they can be better informed to make a choice or no choices if they are to seek returns. There is no free lunch
I don't recall any old folk being told all investments are 100%. But such is optimism.
Talk about blinkers, you're giving me a blinkered view to what speculation means in this context.
If you want to take it out of context, you might as well be saying your life is a speculation? Oh wait....that IS your whole point.
-
Damnit, the word 'speculation' in this case means the expected result one wishes to see in the future from a certain item or situation. It's not some damn example you just gave, xtreyier. And no, I'm not attacking you personally.
-
Inveigle.
Obfuscate.
Yes, if you cannot convince them.