TR EMERITUS

Every Singaporean has a CPF account. Yet more often than not, we have more questions than answers when discussing CPF regulations. DollarsAndSense.sg takes a look at one important regulation that you may not have known existed. Early last week, Singaporeans were up in arms as the government announced that the CPF Minimum Sum (MS) had been increased to $155,000. As per the usual, Singaporeans took to the streets social media to voice their displeasure over this “latest policy change”. While their frustration, as some commentators put it, over the “ever-changing goal post”, is understandable. The changes made to the MS are not entirely unpredictable. Part of the reason why Singaporeans are unhappy could also be due to not fully understanding a policy set in place in 2003. Let us explain how it works. Minimum Sum Is Pegged To The $120,000 Value Of Year 2013 Back in 2003, the Government set a MS of $80,000 to be met for retirement purpose. Along with it, the policy also included two key conditions, which affect Singaporeans even till today. Condition One:  Though it was set at $80,000 in 2003, it was also explicitly stated back then that the MS would gradually increase till it reaches the target of $120,000 in 2015. That means the MS would increase by an average of about $3000 a year. Condition Two: Even the worst financial planner in Singapore would tell you that simply increasing the MS by an average of $3000 per year was not going to fulfill the underlying objective of ensuring Singaporean had enough set aside of retirement for the most modest of lifestyle possible in our expensive city. The presence of inflation would erode the spending power of Singaporeans, even with the MS raised gradually. Hence, condition two was included. Condition two states that inflation would have to be accounted for in the gradual increase of the MS. Not only would Singaporeans have to meet the $120,000 target by 2015, they would also have to hit it while taking inflation into consideration. Condition One + Condition Two = Mostly uninformed hence Angry Singaporeans Logically, we should have been pissed and angry back in 2003. It wouldn’t have taken anyone much analysis for us to realize that the policy essentially meant 12 straight years of the MS increasing. However back in those days, we didn’t have websites such as TR Emeritus & The Real Singapore to increase awareness on such issues. We didn’t have people like Leong Sze Hian or Tan Kin Lian churning out an opinion pieces for us to “like” and “share” on Facebook. Heck, we didn’t even have Roy Ngerng back then. We were too busy reading Xiaxue back in those days to care about these other “trivial” topics. Hence our complaints of unjust policies, accusations of fraud on the part of GIC and the never-ending conspiracy theory of how the government are secretly scheming against the lower and middle class Singaporeans are all coming to the fore today instead, 10 years after when we should have been angry. What Will Happen Next? As stated when the policy was set in 2003, the MS will be increasing till 2015, whereby it would meet the $120,000 – inflation adjusted target. That means the MS is going to increase next year, as it has been for the past 11 years. That means a lot of us are going to get angry again next year, this time, claiming that the Government has shifted the “goal posts.” Hopefully by reading this article, you won’t be shocked when that happens. Notice as well that 2015 falls one year short of the potential 2016 General Elections? Maybe that would provide some buffer time for citizens to cool their heads, and redirect their anger at something else. Timothy Ho * Timothy is an Economics and Finance graduate and also holds a diploma in Media Studies. Being the former president of his school’s Investment & Networking Club, he believes that it is time to change the way people approach financial matters in Singapore. When he is not surfing the Internet on why Research in Motion & Nintendo are dead, he will be busy working on developing dollarsandsense.sg, a website that aims to be the destination for timely and relevant information on personal finance matters presented for the layperson in a bite-sized, interesting, and enjoyable manner.  Read More →

First of all, I would like to thank WP for steadfastly holding on to its call for the nationalisation of our public transport despite being overwhelmed by 80 PAP MPs in parliament. I am fine with contracting companies to help operate the buses. After all, outsourcing is quite a common occurrence these days. But to prevent unscrupulous companies from exploiting Singaporean bus drivers and seeking excuses to hire more foreign drivers to lower their costs, may I suggest that in the public tender, bus companies must state how much they are willing to pay our bus drivers. Also, they must state the minimum ratio of Singaporeans being hired as bus drivers. Better still, those bus companies which are willing to hire 100% Singaporean bus drivers, they will receive bonus points in the public tender consideration. If the companies are paying too low a wage or hiring too few Singaporeans, they should be rejected even if their tender proposal is the lowest. The tender sum should not be the ONLY criterion to be considered for winning the rights to operate our buses. Otherwise, they will want to hire as many foreigners as possible for cost reason. We should not give the companies any excuse to hire more foreign drivers. Since the government now owns and runs the buses, it must take care of Singaporeans first. I do know that if the bus companies are willing to pay a minimum of $2000+ basic, working 8 hours a day for 5 days a week, many Singaporean taxi drivers would be very happy to switch to become bus drivers. I believe many bus drivers in Australia, for example, are Australians themselves and they are paid a very decent wage with good work-life balance. Why can't our own Singaporeans work and live like those in the West? Perhaps some TRE readers living in Australia will be able to enlighten us. What do the brothers and sisters on TRE think of my proposal? Concern for SG workers Related: Govt adopts WP’s call to nationalise public bus industry  Read More →

PM Lee Hsien Loong1) PM Lee curbs Freedom of Speech by using lawsuits against his critics Absolutely not. Singaporeans are still able to criticise, scold, insult PM Lee online with impunity and nothing ever happens to them. Roy Ngerng is still publishing articles about CPF and posting victimised FB posts even after getting 'davindered'. If there was no freedom of speech, would all these be possible? 2) PM Lee is a dictator who smashes his opponents without mercy Nope. Despite having a full 3 days to set things right, Roy Ngerng still requested for a 2 days extension which was agreed by PM Lee. If it was a dictator at helm, Roy Ngerng would be given no extension and no mercy, no? 3) PM Lee is an elite who does not do the work himself No way. If you look closely at Roy Ngerng's defamatory infographic, it defamed not only PM Lee but also other individuals like Tharman and Ho Ching. Rather than sit back and allow others to take Roy to task, PM Lee makes a stand (knowing full well it would cause controversy) and takes Roy Ngerng to court himself. If this is not leading from the front, what is? 4) PM Lee doesn't listen to the people It is precisely because PM Lee is constantly listening to the views of all Singaporeans out there that he even bothers to pay attention to a small-time blogger masquerading as a expert on CPF. 5) PM Lee has to prove he did not misappropriate CPF monies When your neighbour (Roy Ngerng) accuses you (PM Lee) of stealing (misappropriating) his slippers (CPF money), do you (PM Lee) have to prove your innocence or is the onus your neighbour (Roy Ngerng) to provide evidence and back up his accusation? Hong Kit Tan * Article first appeared in www.facebook.com/hongkit.tan/posts/1488692041359948  Read More →