Yes, we are all frustrated GIC, over lack of progress in CPF issue but to vandalise public property is not they way to go and wrong...even though the pap has resorted to legal intimidation to silence Roy we must remain calm in the face of such attack and focus on doing what is best for the pple.
The issue of raising the returns of CPF is widely supported even pro govt journalist s like Chua Mui Hoong say this should be done.
"Raising CPF returns is manifestly the right thing to do. It is true the Government faces political flak if funds under-perform, whereas the current guaranteed return is risk-free financially and politically. But a good government does not shirk from doing what it is right; instead it goes ahead and manages the risk. Even as workers are urged to work longer, they should have the assurance that their old-age savings are also being made to work harder." - Chua Mui Hoong, Straits Times, 9 July 2007
Some facts as we go ahead:
1. Singaporean CPF ranks lowest on adequacy despite high contribution rate to CPF:
The research done jointly by the Australian Centre for Financial Studies and Mercer, a global leader in the retirement business, ranked the retirement income system of 18 countries based on 40 indicators in three areas: adequacy, sustainability and integrity.
Singapore obtained a C grading and ranked 13th. The bottom four places were all occupied by Asian countries - China, South Korea, Japan and India -while the top three were Denmark, the Netherlands and Australia.
2. This inadquacy is caused in part by low returns. Do you know that if cpf return is 6%instead of 2.5%, a retiree wil have 2.5 times or 150% more on the day he retire. Where did his 150% go? To the GIC. Every dollar that an aged retiree take out $1.5 goes to GIC. Hence CPF monies contributed by Singaporeans has been used to created reserves in GIC which earns 6% return on our money.
3. CPF funds if managed by the best to seek higher stable returns will provide retirees a 150% improvement over the current situation instead of reserve building.
4. The pap instead of doing this is trying to make pple work longer, makke them sell away their homes in lease buy backs and worse of all increasing minimum sum. . Obvious PAP elites wants to continue this scheme to benefit from high paying lucrative jobs managing large reserves. But this is wrong as ppl suffer poor quality of retirement. It is unjust.
For the above reasons, there is anger and frustration. Those who peddle the dishonest argument that account holders are made to bore losses fail to explain why almost all major pensioin funds can manage this. In the first place to pay the fixed 2.5% the. GIC must generate a long term rate higher than this so it is a matter of smoothing the returns over a few yrs to credit a positive return every yr to reflect the long term average return.
The refusal of the pap to do what is just and right for the people is leading to frustration and resentment each time they force up min sum and enforce schemes like CPF life which has low payout inorder to avoid paying proper returns on our
The issue of raising the returns of CPF is widely supported even pro govt journalist s like Chua Mui Hoong say this should be done.
"Raising CPF returns is manifestly the right thing to do. It is true the Government faces political flak if funds under-perform, whereas the current guaranteed return is risk-free financially and politically. But a good government does not shirk from doing what it is right; instead it goes ahead and manages the risk. Even as workers are urged to work longer, they should have the assurance that their old-age savings are also being made to work harder." - Chua Mui Hoong, Straits Times, 9 July 2007
Some facts as we go ahead:
1. Singaporean CPF ranks lowest on adequacy despite high contribution rate to CPF:
The research done jointly by the Australian Centre for Financial Studies and Mercer, a global leader in the retirement business, ranked the retirement income system of 18 countries based on 40 indicators in three areas: adequacy, sustainability and integrity.
Singapore obtained a C grading and ranked 13th. The bottom four places were all occupied by Asian countries - China, South Korea, Japan and India -while the top three were Denmark, the Netherlands and Australia.
2. This inadquacy is caused in part by low returns. Do you know that if cpf return is 6%instead of 2.5%, a retiree wil have 2.5 times or 150% more on the day he retire. Where did his 150% go? To the GIC. Every dollar that an aged retiree take out $1.5 goes to GIC. Hence CPF monies contributed by Singaporeans has been used to created reserves in GIC which earns 6% return on our money.
3. CPF funds if managed by the best to seek higher stable returns will provide retirees a 150% improvement over the current situation instead of reserve building.
4. The pap instead of doing this is trying to make pple work longer, makke them sell away their homes in lease buy backs and worse of all increasing minimum sum. . Obvious PAP elites wants to continue this scheme to benefit from high paying lucrative jobs managing large reserves. But this is wrong as ppl suffer poor quality of retirement. It is unjust.
For the above reasons, there is anger and frustration. Those who peddle the dishonest argument that account holders are made to bore losses fail to explain why almost all major pensioin funds can manage this. In the first place to pay the fixed 2.5% the. GIC must generate a long term rate higher than this so it is a matter of smoothing the returns over a few yrs to credit a positive return every yr to reflect the long term average return.
The refusal of the pap to do what is just and right for the people is leading to frustration and resentment each time they force up min sum and enforce schemes like CPF life which has low payout inorder to avoid paying proper returns on our
