Singapore Democrats

WHEN THE PAP became the government in 1959, it increased the CPF contributions through the years, raising them to as much as 50 percent in 1984 and 1985 before the 1985 recession forced the government to bring the rates back down.

The original intent of the CPF was to help workers save for their old age and for them to be less dependent on the state when they are no longer economically productive. Few quarrelled with this notion. Since then, however, the system has allowed members to use their savings to finance their homes, pay medical bills, service insurance policies and even punt on the stock market.

The use of the CPF for extraneous purposes triggers the question of whether the savings are being diluted. In 1997, the mean balance was less than $30,000. As this is only the average, it does not take into account the many who have savings well below the $30,000 mark.

Economist Mukul Asher at the NUS was already warning that because of the way the CPF system is run, “many currently near retirement and with low balances may not find it possible to make individual or family provision for social security needs.” The subject was also one of the central issues on which the SDP campaigned during the 1997 general elections. It wasn’t until 1999, however, that an inter-ministerial committee set up by the government finally admitted that many Singaporeans “assume that their CPF savings are enough for retirement” when in fact they are not.

The question that is screaming to be asked is: What has happened to all the CPF money then? The simple answer is that most people have used their savings to finance their houses. Financial analyst Dan Fineman observes: “CPF financing has contributed to high land prices, the government gains from home purchases, while pension balances dwindle...CPF will prove grossly inadequate for meeting individual retirement needs.”

The way CPF balances are being invested by the government has also been called into question. In fact, Asher calculates that returns to CPF members between 1987-1998 was zero percent, with five of the 11 years actually registering negative returns.

Even the World Bank commented on this outrageous situation. In 1999, it noted that on average CPF’s interest rate was in fact lower by 0.4 percent than those of the four Singapore banks to which it was pegged. India, Malaysia, and the United States on the other hand have done much better for their people.

This finding was reinforced by an economist at SG Securities who noted that the average real return on Singapore’s financial reserves is one of the lowest in Asia. “We have a problem in Singapore,” he cited. NUS business school professor Koh Seng Kee pointed out that “Should there be a financial or political crisis, the wealth of Singaporeans will dissipate quickly.”

Comments

Add New Search RSS

Tak Boleh Tahan!!!  -     Sat, 31 May 2008 4:13 pm Tak boleh tahan!!! Without obligation,kindly return back all the tears and sweats of our folks piggy-bank monies upon the age of 55 so they fulfill their dreams before their "dateline". Tak boleh tahan!!! There's should have a kind of watch-dog to always barking over this matter at the face of PAP Junta's.Sorry,not through the mainstream media but through the no boundary,no barbwire,no obstacle which called internet. Tak boleh tahan!!! Quote 8   0

Tak Boleh Tahan!!!  -     Mon, 09 Jun 2008 2:06 pm Tak boleh tahan!!! LKY,son and cronies want to invest using the CPF monies no one can stop. Tak boleh tahan!!! End of the day kindly return back in full to the people's when they reach 55. Tak boleh tahan!!! Don't give excuse that the folks cannot manage their retirement funds and over-spend. Tak boleh tahan!!! LKY over-spend in UBS and other finance houses with no proven proof might get it back,no one complain.Whereas,the retiree's spending their blood,sweat and tears monies he and cronies starts to come out with this and that ruling. Tak boleh tahan!!! Quote 6   0

Anonymous  -     Mon, 23 Jun 2008 10:35 am Quote: NUS business school professor Koh Seng Kee pointed out that “Should there be a financial or political crisis, the wealth of Singaporeans will dissipate quickly.” Has it NOT already been??? Or at least being? What if, say, another country decides to do kind and to do good by offering all Singaporeans free citizenship on no condition and that the offer was taken up and fully subscribed? Will there be enough to pay out and paid in full? I mean, it was in good faith good money that Singaporeans and their bosses (the private sector) put in duly each and every month, year in, year out. Money that would have been solid cash had there not been a CPF scam, sorry, scheme. Singapore banks now have in place a certain deposits payout policy subject to a cap of $20,000. Does the CPF board have a similar policy? Does it guarantee a minimum sum if and when a 'run on the bank (CPF)' hppens or there's no cap, no limit, full payment up to last cent in account as have been led to believe? Quote 5   0

TABOLEH TAHAN  -  CPF MELT DOWN    Sun, 29 Jun 2008 5:58 am WITH THE CURRENT GLOBAL MELT DOWN IN FINANCIAL MARKET, SINGAPOREAN CAN NEVER THINK OF GETTING THEIR FULL CPF BACK. ALL MELT DOWN ON UBS AND CITIGROUP SHARES. MINIMUM SUM WILL KEEP INCREASING UNTIL NOT ABLE TO GET EVEN A SINGLE CENT BACK AT AGE 55 YEARS. Quote 4   0

Write comment
Name:
Email:
Website:
Title:
UBBCode:	-color-aquablackbluefuchsiagraygreenlimemaroonnavyolivepurpleredsilvertealwhiteyellow -size-tinysmallmediumlargehuge
	Please input the anti-spam code that you can read in the image.

Powered by !JoomlaComment 3.26

3.26 Copyright (C) 2008 Compojoom.com / Copyright (C) 2007 Alain Georgette / Copyright (C) 2006 Frantisek Hliva. All rights reserved."