GMS: Can Sporeans take CPF and govt to court over ever-rising min sum

[Confuseous]

(Just look at this chart. Do you find it strange here? Why would the minimum sum increment percentage suddenly shot up in 2009 from the average 5 to 6 percent to over 10%? 2008 just happened to be minibond bombed and recession! You go figure that out!)

CPF is unlike other Social Security Funds which will be affected by an aging population drastically. Other Social Security Funds depends on the contributions of present working adults to finance the retirement of those retired citizens. Such system will definitely be affected by an inverted bell shape aging demographic trend. CPF is a SELF FINANCED retirement scheme in which, each and everyone of us finance our own retirement by our own savings during our working life. Thus, there is ABSOLUTELY NO REASONS for CPF to face any cashflow problems due to changing aging population at all.

Thus, I am VERY VERY PUZZLED WHY CPF and PAP government are doing all these stunts. Those Singaporeans who tend to squander away their own CPF money when they withdraw lump sum, ARE THE MINORITY and this should not be used as an excuse for CPF to be our baby sitter of our retirement funds! Most Singaporeans are very conservative financially.

When CPF was first founded, it gave a booklet to depositors, proudly declared on the front page, you can withdraw your money at age 55 years old. I am no lawyer but is there any contract signed between depositors and CPF with regards to depositing money into CPF? I remembered I have signed some document when I opened my CPF accounts. Does the contract says CPF can change the rules and delay the withdrawal of our money as and when they like?

If there is a contract signed here, I hope some good lawyers can look into whether CPF has breached their contract obligations. Look, even insurance companies are governed by laws and I believe they cannot suka suka change their rules and delay payment to their clients!

Even if the contract signed gave some power to CPF, but the absurdity of allowing CPF to forever increase the minimum sum and forcing people to buy life annuity without any choice, is really against common sense and thus, common law.

I am seriously hoping that there are good soul lawyers out there who would want to look into the feasibility of bringing CPF and PAP government to court; either sue them for breaching contractual obligation or go straight for judiciary review of the unfetter power given to CPF to lock up OUR MONEY! And I hope Singaporeans at large would agree to donate just a little amount for this lawsuit, which will have enormous implications for you, me and our future generations.

Goh Meng Seng

http://singaporealternatives.blogspot.sg/2014/05/should-we-take-cpf-and-pap-government.html

 

[LEGEND]

Ah Goh is the BEST! He comes my constituency. I give him my vote.

 

[chonburifc]

Surely can when the day PAPPIES topple. But by that time, can only print monthly statements cos PAPPIES all runroad with the CHEE PEE EF liaoz. Stinkees SONG BOH?

 

[borom]

Its actually a good idea-i.e can the govt just do anything just because it has a 2/3 majority in parliament?

This is very close to a modern form of slavery.
John Locke discussed natural rights as being "life, liberty, and estate (property)", and argued that such fundamental rights could not be surrendered in the social contract. Preservation of the natural rights to life, liberty, and property was claimed as justification for the rebellion of the American colonies.

Our savings/CPF is one of those "inalienable rights" that could not be surrendered by citizens to the government.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_and_legal_rights

 

[tanwahtiu]

Start a non profit one on social ground, from there it can collect money legitimately and accountability, angmoh style.

This is why PAP are afraid of social organizations and keep closing them down.

(Just look at this chart. Do you find it strange here? Why would the minimum sum increment percentage suddenly shot up in 2009 from the average 5 to 6 percent to over 10%? 2008 just happened to be minibond bombed and recession! You go figure that out!)

CPF is unlike other Social Security Funds which will be affected by an aging population drastically. Other Social Security Funds depends on the contributions of present working adults to finance the retirement of those retired citizens. Such system will definitely be affected by an inverted bell shape aging demographic trend. CPF is a SELF FINANCED retirement scheme in which, each and everyone of us finance our own retirement by our own savings during our working life. Thus, there is ABSOLUTELY NO REASONS for CPF to face any cashflow problems due to changing aging population at all.

Goh Meng Seng

http://singaporealternatives.blogspot.sg/2014/05/should-we-take-cpf-and-pap-government.html

 

[Sinkie]

2016 will be a very interesting year.