TR EMERITUS

Hi Mr Gilbert Goh, I would like to take this opportunity to inform you regarding someone whom I know that might need your assistance. Attached is a picture of the person who is living in a tiny place. My friend who goes by the name of Lokman is married and also living with his own mother who is paralysed right now. Lokman is not working as he has to take care of his mom and the only person who works is his wife but unfortunately her salary is not much. Lokman is also sick – kidney failure, diabetes etc. But he can’t afford to pay for his own medical cost due to his mom’s condition. He mentions about Hari Raya which is around the corner and his mom would love to feel the mood of how Hari Raya is. My friends and I would love to help to make his dream and his mom’s come true during this Ramadan. As I say, we  have made  donation for him and his family like Food Ration and donation of cash. My point is if you are able to help or to assist this matter not just for Ramadhan Month but in the longer term, what will be your option? Thank you for your time in reading this email. Wishing you and blessing you with prosperity in future. Sincerely,   Nur Fazliana Transitioning.org Editor’s note: We will be making plan to visit this family to establish how we can assist them for the long term.  We know that certain families need more than our $100 once-off  financial aid. We should be embarking on a sponsorship programme whereby we will invite sponsors to adopt a family and donate to them a certain amount for a specific period. Details on this will be out soon. We are here for you – no one will be left behind.   * Letter first appeared in Transitioning.org - a support site run by Mr Gilbert Goh    Read More →

Medishield Life – PAP’s latest pot of gold, government’s abdication of its healthcare responsibility On 15 June, I wrote “Medishield Life – huge premium increase will be an issue” before the announcement of Medishield Life (ML) premiums. By recently confirming the huge premium increase of between 111% and 189%, our worst fear has been realised. In any true democracy, citizens would not have been enslaved to a national insurance scheme costing an arm and a leg through legislation. Expect future premiums, after 2019, to continue climbing at our past GDP rate. Citizens must be wary and sceptical whenever the calculative PAP offers ‘assistance’ to us. Especially when the scheme is suffixed by “Life” eg CPF Life. While CPF Life will ‘help’ us by taking away our retirement savings, ML will enslave us to a LIFEtime of high premiums. Health Minister Gan has said our ML “premiums will remain the same for the first five years”. With an increase of up to 189%, of course the MOH is able to do so. I am sure other insurance companies could offer the same assurance, or probably better, after the increase. Government abdicates its healthcare responsibility The reason for such a huge increase is the government is forcing the younger generation to cross-subsidise premiums of elderly Singaporeans and those with pre-existing conditions. (premium rates decreases/plateau with age in ML in table below) A typical premium table where premiums increase with age That premiums go up with age is common sense.  ML premiums decrease/plateau with age is confirmation of PAP’s cross-subsidising activities. Huge jump in ML premiums, plateau with age Self reliance policy an insult to citizens The government has justified spending the minimal sum on citizens’ healthcare but when it comes to foreigners, billion-dollar investments or mega projects, it’s a different story. In every society, there will be a minority who will abuse the system. The PAP takes advantage of this fact to profit from the majority. Such a policy is an insult to citizens and implies the majority will abuse our system. Does it also not reflect on our leaders who probably have similar abusive mindsets? Singaporeans are by and large a hardworking lot and we DO have dignity. The money is there but not the compassion The total revenue collected by the PAP has been under-reported for years. According to Leong Sze Hian, our budget surplus, according to IMF standard, should be $187 billion between 2005 and 2012 instead of $17.35 billion. Revenue collected by the government is meant for distribution to meet the NEEDS of ALL citizens. The government publishes misleading figures to make it seem a monumental task to take care of citizens’ NEEDS. Whenever it renders any kind of assistance, the media will blow it all out of proportion to make the PAP look fantastic when it is merely discharging its responsibilities. Taxes already paid, don’t complicate the system! Every citizen should be given the same privileges. Perhaps it is still not obvious to most that the way PAP goes about complicating straightforward policies is plainly wrong. Citizens have already contributed to the common pool for distribution ie direct/indirect taxes meant for equal distribution. The wealthy have already contributed at a higher income tax bracket/GST. It is illogical to offer subsidies according to income status. Let citizens determine our needs and insure according to our means. Remove the stupid policy of means testing where the state thinks for the individual. How PAP complicates a simple system Source: CNA Pioneer Generation Package for elderly Singaporeans’ benefit or propaganda The Pioneer Generation Package (PGP), with its generous ML subsidies for Singaporeans aged 65 and above, was orchestrated to make the huge ML premium more palatable; elderly/retired Singaporeans simply would not have been able to afford such premiums. The PGP was merely propaganda. The PAP spends only on productive assets which generate return$. Healthcare does not contribute to revenue but is an expense item to the PAP. It’s similar to the construction of infrastructures where the PAP prefers to flood our country with foreigners first (generate economic activity) and subsequently build the necessary infrastructures (expense item). CPF Medisave goldmine PAP has plenty of goldmines eg at the LTA ie COE, ERP, traffic wardens, etc. At the HDB, it would be public housing flats. It has now set its sights on the CPF Medisave account (MA). CPF MA balances ballooned 41% in 4 years from 2009 to 2013 From the table above, the $65 billion is clearly irresistible to the PAP. The $4 billion in subsidies for ML till 2019 is but a small ‘investment’ which is expected to yield huge guaranteed returns. Note there are many such shortcuts in our budget revenue. Where CPF members are guaranteed the lowest interest rates in the world, expect to pay the highest national healthcare insurance premium in future. Conclusion The PAP has identified the pot of Medisave gold and our high ML premiums reflect this discovery. The PGP has all along been propaganda to make the huge ML premiums more palatable, not that we really have any say. There is no reason to structure subsidies according to income brackets because the government has already collected tax revenues. It is the PAP’s responsibility to take care of elderly citizens and those with pre-existing medical conditions rejected by private health insurers. It has abdicated its responsibility by transferring/loading huge ML premiums on the younger generation. What happens when their Medisave is depleted/insufficient for co- insurance and deductible payments? Long-term planning? The PAP says the scheme will benefit citizens. After premiums are doubled or tripled and coming out from the pockets of citizens, no one should expect the PAP to tell us there is zero benefit. Phillip Ang *  The author blogs at  likedatosocanmeh.  Read More →

Singaporeans’ CPF: “See No Evil, Hear No Evil” (9 Jul) - Yesterday, parliament sat to discuss the CPF. It’s been nearly two months since Singaporeans stirred and the national call for the government to be honest and transparent about what they are actually doing with our CPF is still ongoing today. Many truths have finally unravelled over the past two months and more is being exposed each day as we go along. Roy Ngerng Since the end of May, there have been numerous attempts by the government to explain their version of what they are doing with our CPF. It first started on The Manpower Blog on 25 May, followed by The Straits Times and Singapolitics. Deputy Prime Minister Tharman Shanmugaratnam and Minister without portfolio Lim Swee Say chimed in last month as well. The government's feedback portal REACH also did a poll with 1,000 Singaporeans. Parliament also debated the issue at the last sitting and at the current sitting yesterday, where Tharman and Manpower Minister Tan Chuan-Jin had replied to parliamentary questions. PAP’s Member of Parliament (MP) Hri Kumar and Minister for Social and Family Development Chan Chun Sing also held forums with their residents. The other political parties, National Solidarity Party (NSP) and the Singapore People’s Party (SPP) also organised their own forums to get feedback from Singaporeans on the CPF. There has never been so much debate on the CPF in the recent history of Singapore before. The national interest among Singaporeans to demand for truthful answers from the government has continued for two months now, and will continue as long as answers are not properly given. Thus far, the government has given textbook scripted answers of their version of the story. The Government Devised The CPF Minimum Sum To Give Singaporeans $1,200 But Singaporeans Are Only Able To Receive $260? So the government's story goes that Singaporeans do not understand what the CPF Minimum Sum is about. The government explains that the CPF Minimum Sum of $155,000 is computed to allow Singaporeans to receive a monthly CPF payout of $1,200 every month or what the government has computed as the basic living expenses necessary for Singaporeans (for a lower-middle income household) – how this computation is done has never been revealed. Yet, where the government finally (somewhat) reveals (for the first time) that possibly about 85% of Singaporeans are not able to meet the CPF Minimum Sum fully in cash, doesn’t this mean that 85% of Singaporeans are unable retire even with the basic amount necessary and are not able to retire adequately? Also, the government claims that to meet the CPF Minimum Sum, Singaporeans are able to pledge our property to meet half of this amount. Our property apparently still belongs to us, unless we decide to monetise this pledge into cash payouts, which then Tan Chuan-Jin explained that, “What it means is that with your smaller amount, your monthly payout will be correspondingly lesser, and that is all.” That is all? Doesn’t make sense, does it? Then, so what if you pledge your property as half of the Minimum Sum when it wouldn’t allow you to receive a payout of $1,200? At most, this means that most Singaporeans would be able to receive a payout of less than $600. Then why the property pledge? The government hasn’t elaborated on this but clearly if you do need to turn your property pledge into cash for payouts, this would involve selling your flat, wouldn’t it? Tan Chuan-Jin also revealed that the MPs receive “an average of about 500 appeals annually from members 55 years and older who request to use more Retirement Account savings for housing, (where)… two-thirds of the appeals” are approved. Is it not ironic (and completely unnecessary) that Singaporeans have to appeal to the government to allow us to use our CPF to pay for our homes, only to have to pledge our homes to meet the CPF Minimum Sum, and then sell our homes so that we are able to receive adequate payouts from the CPF? Convoluted much, and unnecessarily so? In fact, if the property pledge doesn’t serve any logical purpose except to let Singaporeans meet the CPF Minimum Sum on paper, then why is it even used as a means to meet the Minimum Sum at all? Finally, when we look at the actual CPF Life payout that Singaporeans receive, Tharman had revealed in 2011 that the median payout is only a miserly $260. Not surprising, is it, when 85% of Singaporeans are not able to meet the $1,200 mark required in the CPF Minimum Sum, and 70% are not even able to meet the $600 mark? If 85% of Singaporeans are not only not able to receive $1,200 in payouts but vastly lower amounts of less than $300, doesn’t this mean that the CPF is drastically inadequate and in need of immediate reform? Is it not perplexing that the government continues to hold on strenuously to a system which has become severely broken? The Singapore Government Pays Singaporeans The Lowest (Un)fair Interest Rates In The World Second, the government claims that the 2.5% to 4% interest that the government pays is a “secure” interest which is “fair”. What does “fair” mean, anyway? Interest rates are either high or low. Evidently, the 2.5% interest rate that our CPF largely earn is the lowest in the world for retirement funds. Whether it is “fair” or not becomes then an issue of semantics. Low is low. So, the government hedges the whole “trustworthiness” of their governance to claim that this 2.5% to 4% interest rate is thus “secure” and Singaporeans should thus feel assured. But what does how much our interest earns have anything to do with the government, and whether we can trust them (or not)? Does that mean that as long as we blindly trust the government, we will be able to blindly believe that the interest rates are good enough? The government has also claimed that, "Both Standard and Poor’s and Moody’s recently reaffirmed our credit (triple-A) rating" but the truth is that it was reported yesterday that, "Moody's Investors Service says its the outlook on Singapore's banks remains "negative" over the next 12 to 18 months." The government also claims that the 2.5% to 4% interest is a “floor” rate, or the lowest that the government is willing to give. But isn’t this 2.5% to 4% similarly a “ceiling” as the interest rates on the CPF have never gone above this rate since 1999 or for 15 years now? Doesn't this mean this is also the highest the government is willing to give? Calling this low interest a “floor” rate becomes then, obviously another game of semantics. To Singaporeans, the low interest is quite clearly a ceiling rate, where we can never earn higher interest rates. If we put aside the play on words and look at the 2.5% to 4% by itself and compare it to all other retirement funds among the advanced countries which earn an average of 6%, then this interest rate is low. It is low (in fact, it is very low). Period. The government can throw in words, such as “fair”, “secure” “a floor rate” to beautify their presentation and try to sway our perception but take that all away, then low is low. Bad is bad. Even so, the government still hasn’t explained why our CPF Ordinary Account is earning only a low interest of 2.5%. The CPF OA’s interest is pegged to the banks’ interest rates, but why is this so, when our CPF is invested in government bonds? Then, shouldn’t the CPF OA’s interest be pegged to the government bonds, which are earning a higher interest than the banks? Why Has The Government Set Such A High Minimum Sum But Give Singaporeans Such Low Interest Rates On Our CPF That We Will Never Be Able To Meet The Minimum Sum? The government might thus claim that the CPF Minimum Sum is set at a level to accord basic living but at no point in time did they explain how they are going to help Singaporeans reach this basic minimum. The government continues to reiterate that the 2.5% to 4% is a “fair” return but where the interest rates have remained at this low level for the last 15 years and where Singaporeans are still not able to meet the CPF Minimum Sum, isn’t it sufficiently clear to the government that at this low interest rate that Singaporeans are earning on our CPF, there is no way that we would be able to ever meet the basic minimum amount required? Isn’t there a clear disjoint then? Why would the government propagate the CPF Minimum Sum, knowing clear well that at the “(un)fair” and low interest rates that they are giving to Singaporeans on our CPF that we will never be able to meet the Minimum Sum, never be able to earn a basic minimum amount and never be able to retire? Does it not appear then that the policy making of the government thus seem somewhat hypocritical? Singaporeans Are Made To Take On The Risks For The GIC’s Investments By Paying With Our CPF Finally, for the first time ever (again), the government finally admits that Singaporeans’ CPF is indeed invested in the GIC, and finally told Singaporeans the truth after hiding this information for so many decades. Singaporeans have speculated about this for years, however the government has refused to admit to this. However, by June this year, when the floodgates can no longer be held back, the government finally bowed down to public pressure and admitted that they have been taking our CPF to invest in the GIC (and in the past, in the Temasek Holdings). However, even then, the government continues to claim that by transferring our CPF to be invested in the GIC, the government is letting the GIC take on the “risk” of investment. They claim to give us a low 2.5% to 4% interest because this is a “secure” rate. GIC then takes our CPF to supposedly invest in higher risk investments, and because they apparently take on the “risk”, they get to keep the interest earned. The government also claimed that, “The CPF has also avoided imposing risk on tax-payers”, but where the interest that the GIC (and the Temasek Holdings used to) earns on our CPF is not returned, this has been described by the Asian Development Bank Institute as an “implicit tax” that the government is making Singaporeans pay. Then, isn’t this a risk that Singaporean tax-payers are taking on, for the government? The government might paint the picture that the GIC is taking on the risk for Singaporeans, but the truth is that Singaporeans are the ones taking on the risk for the GIC, by paying this implicit tax to the government (or is it the GIC?), to help the GIC to stay afloat. Meanwhile, who sinks? And as if it’s not already bad enough, it does not help that the government itself is on the Board of Directors of the GIC. Then, where Singaporeans are made to take on the risk for the GIC, isn’t the government making us shoulder this unnecessary burden? But wait a minute, isn’t the government supposed to protect Singaporeans? Isn’t there a major conflict of interest here? (Click to enlarge) The government has also still not chosen to admit this, but if not for our CPF, will the GIC even have this money to use for investment? If so, isn’t it only logical that the interest earned by the GIC be returned to Singaporeans, unless Singaporeans give specific permission for the government and the GIC to take our money away (but have we?). Why is the government giving us the lowest interest rates on pension funds in the world? Even as the Worker’s Party Low Thia Kiang questioned how it is that the government has to give this convoluted reasoning, when with about $300 billion in the CPF, there are adequate funds in the CPF for it to be managed on its own, to be able to take on the risks and give higher returns to Singaporeans, the government continues to take the stance that it is better for GIC to take on the “risks”. Mr Low has obviously exposed the flaw in the government’s reasoning but in a bid to hold its ground, the government continues to defend its stance, which has been much weakened by their circular reasoning. The CPF System Is So Thoroughly Broken Yet The Government Tries To Fix A Leaking Tap By Stuffing A Piece Of Cloth By now, it is clear that the CPF has been very badly managed, to put it the most simply. The government has created layers and layers of problems – the CPF Minimum Sum, the Medi-schemes and liberalisation policies as Tan Chuan-Jin had himself admitted that “Many (Singaporeans) have low CPF balances because of… more liberal withdrawal rules which… (have) depleted their CPF savings”. It is perhaps also contradictory when the government claims that the CPF offers flexibility for Singaporeans for housing and healthcare, when Lim Swee Say at the same time counters that Singaporeans should “defer cash withdrawals”, which thus directly contradicts the idea of this flexibility, doesn’t it? Yet, instead of admitting that these patchwork solutions do not work and admit that an overhaul is desperately needed for the CPF to function again, the government chose to go through a series of logical leaps and fanciful words, just so to mask the inherent flaws that is running Singaporeans' CPF into the ground. It is perhaps pitiful that where the government has such a perfect opportunity now to finally be transparent about how they are managing the CPF and to be honest but the government chose to go back into their tortoise shell, while continuing to dress up the already cluttered and broken CPF in new clothes. The government needs to acknowledge that what Singaporeans want at this point is a clear admission by the government on the lack of transparency and clarity of the system and to reform the system by going back to the basics of what a pension fund is supposed to do for Singaporeans – which is to allow us to earn enough to retire. And to do so, the government needs to increase the wages of Singaporeans and the CPF interest rates – two of the only and most direct solutions which would immediately resolve the issue facing us today, and to give Singaporeans choice on how to invest and when to withdraw their monies. Yet, even as the solutions present themselves the most clearly, the government refuses to take them as the government continues to mire themselves in a convoluted pool of mess. It is perhaps most perplexing what the government is thinking when they rather withdraw than engage honestly. ---------------------------- #ReturnOurCPF, An Event To Ask The Government To Be Transparent To Singaporeans On What They Are Doing With Our CPF And To Reform The CPF System, was held at Hong Lim Park on Saturday 12 July 2014. As citizens of our country, we cannot sit back and witness the change, or lack thereof, that is happening in our country and allow that to run our country into the ground. It is not a joke when our elderly Singaporeans are unable to retire and when the CPF system is no longer able to meet the needs of Singaporeans, and yet the government is unable to respond adequately. It is not funny. At some point, we have to decide whether to take a stand or not, and whether to speak up for our rights, for the longer we stay silent on this issue, the longer we do not see the necessary reforms required for our CPF happening, and the longer our lives are put in an uncomfortable scenario that can be dire for our nation in the longer term. Roy Ngerng *  The author blogs at  The Heart Truths  Read More →