*Will be updated as i gather more information.
Added On Workfare 20/08
On Philanthropy
Speech in Mandarin, Point 13
PM cited a few famous philanthropists past and present, and encouraged more successful people to take up this role. I agree with that, but not with him saying that its something the Govt cannot do. He said philanthropists have the moral high-ground and provide a model example to the rest of the citizens, and that an MP would have to think twice about admonish someone, a Minister thrice. There’s not reason that an MP or Minister cannot do philanthropic work, or deeds to deserve the respect of the people. Rather than call out for others to start giving, why not first set an example, as among the highest paid people in Singapore (JB and some say the world), so that others can see that they truly care and are serious about the community.
On Showing us the Old People
Working Longer, 1 b iii (6)
Resident: Because I didn’t know I was going to live so long!”
Unfortunately, if the dead could talk, many would say they didn’t know they would die so young. Yes we should plan for our old age, but within reasonable extent please.
On CPF
Improving CPF, 4 b iii-iv
iii. You can still use the $60,000 for housing or medical expenses
This is a little misleading. You can only use whatever is in your Ordinary Account (OA) for housing expenses. Therefore if you just have $20,000 in your OA, you will be able to use that, and take a loan for the rest, to be paid off with future CPF OA deposits. The cap on additional 1% interest for the combined accounts (OA + Special, Medisave, and Retirement Accounts) will still be in effect on the first $60,000, just that the OA is empty after the property purchase.
iv. But not to take out to invest on your own (through CPFIS)
Always strings attached. Now, we cannot use the first $60,000 in the combined accounts to invest under the CPFIS. So most people can forget about actively trying to grow their CPF funds by themselves till they’re middle-aged and have that surplus to work with. I’m not arguing whether 1% risk-free is better then 3% (arbitrary) with risk, but on them molly-coddling us once again. When i earn my salary, i expect to be given the option to decide what to do with it.
Still on the 1% increase, its about time they raised it. When online savings accounts, not even fixed deposits, can reach 2% (Standard Charted and Maybank a while back) 2.5% on forced savings with so many restrictions that keeps the money locked in really is pathetic. However, whats with the cap? With minimum sum reaching $120,000 in a few years time, we’d be getting the additional 1% on just half of it. The limit of the amount of funds we can transfer to the Special Account (SA) equal to the minimum sum, is another cap that limits our “returns” on our “investment” in the CPF. Our cash is locked in, and we can’t even maximize returns. If CPFB can afford to distribute an additional 1% from the returns they make from investing our funds, they should give it for the whole amount, and not take the profit from what is above the cap.
On Workfare
Working Longer, 4 c iii
Will increasing the payout instead encourage employers to lower wages? I, as an employee under the old workfare scheme, would much rather get $1,450 a month, which entitles me to $100 a month of workfare bonus (provided i work at least 6 months), than $1,510 a month, which excludes me from the bonus. Let’s say under free-market conditions the monthly pay is $1,501, under the old workfare, cut-throat employers will offer a monthly pay of $1,402 (workfare bonus $100), and employees should logically take it for the extra $1 while employers save $99. With the doubling of handouts, will this further stretch the disparity between market wages and real wages? Is there a law that handles errant employers that i have missed?
