Comments: Mellanie Hewlitt
The Head lines in the 15 June 2006 issue of the government controlled media blared "Singaporeans have right attitudes towards retirement: survey". The CNA article (appended at the bottom of the page) reported that Singaporeans supported retiring later.
What the pro PAP media did not go on to report was the fact that most Singaporeans did not have a choice in this matter as they would not have enough savings to retire on. So it was basically Hobson's choice.
It again shows how important it is to get THE FULL FACTS AND VIEW THE ENTIRE PICTURE. We append below past article on this subject for your review.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
An old article re-circulated to show that old issued are still not solved.
From: David See dslk8348@y...
In other words, "Work Till You Drop Dead!".
Sg_Review
Well-argued letter from a young S'porean (whose brain is obviously
ten times bigger than those "peanut brains" of Million-Dollar
Ministers) :
No rest? Try 'no money'
It's not that elderly people don't want to retire, many of them
simply cannot afford to
Weekend TODAY • September 24, 2005
Letter from Rick Lim Say Kiong
I refer to your report "No rest for Singaporeans" (Sept 21).
Just as Tampines GRC MP Sin Boon Ann is surprised by the "constant
cry for employment" by the elderly, I am surprised that he does not
fully comprehend the constant worry on the minds of these people.
Mr Sin asked why the elderly cannot retire early and enjoy life, and
asked if their expectations of life are too high.
Look around our food courts and hawker centres. Are the senior
citizens working there as cleaners because they are saving to
purchase a condominium or a luxury car? Or are they working because
they need to feed themselves and their families?
Are the aged not able to "retire early and enjoy life" because of the
high cost of living in Singapore?
Most elderly people probably want to retire early and live the life
they have always dreamt of.
Some, of course, may wish to continue working, but cleaning with its
low pay and long hours is probably not what they want to spend their
twilight years doing.
Recently, a student from China who was interviewed said that he found
it strange that the cleaners in Singapore are so elderly, whereas in
his country, they would be enjoying their retirement years at that
age.
The Government may not want to leave the greying population behind,
but there are those falling through the gaps in the social safety
net. It would be advisable to review the high cost of living,
including the regular utilities and transport fee hikes.
In housing, too, the elderly cannot downgrade from their current
flats without incurring a resale levy when they purchase a smaller
one from the Housing and Development Board, even if they had suffered
a loss in the sale.
Based on the feedback session, if the current cohort of older
Singaporeans feels this way, think of what the present generation of
youngsters will feel like in years to come.
They may pack up and leave before they grow too old and face a bleak
future here.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
-
Mellanie Hewlitt
Singapore Review
20 Dec 2004
Can't Afford to Retire? That Means No Babies !!!
I was reading the article "Can you AFFORD to retire?" in the 18 Dec
2004 issue of the Straits Times and recalled that only just recently
the government was renewing efforts to encourage Singaporeans to have
more children.
Once again the severe myopia permeating the ranks of Singapore's
million dollar cabinet ministers is baffling.
The issue of affordability of retirement and dwindling babies are
related. If you cannot afford to retire then its also highly unlikely
that you can afford to have babies.
Solve the earlier problem and you would be half way there in getting
those much wanted babies. In fact this is nothing new and has been
part of the evolutionary process for thousands of years. Many species
will delay having off springs during periods of extended famine and
draught and one does not need to be paid a million dollars to see
that harsh reality.
Yet, contrary to thousands of years of evolutionary
progress/precedent, this government is telling you to have kids even
when you cannot save enough to look after yourself during your
retirement years.
Singaporeans by and large are a hardworking, industrious, lot who
live within their means and are unquestioningly obedient to their
overlords. In-spite of deteriorating work conditions many still try
hard to save enough for their golden years.
But its not that easy when decades of stingy fiscal and monetary
policies have sapped the average person's disposable income and
retirement reserves. Only in Singapore do you have the unholy
situation where state reserves actually blossom to grotesque portions
even whilst personal savings dwindle and personal incomes
deteriorate. We end up with the state directly profiteering from the
very citizens it is supposed to look after!
To make matters worse, land prices have been artificially inflated
for many decaded resulting in escalating costs of living.
Hang on, lets back track here. Was this not the same government who
was declaring to the world that Singapore has attained Swiss
standards of living? This government has asserted that;
a) Singaporean workers are better paid then their counterparts in the
US, UK and Australia;
b) That Singapore also has very competitive cost of living?
c) And Singaporeans also have one of the highest savings rates in the
world?
How much of the above assertions are mere propaganda and how much is
actual fact? If you put a) b) and c) together it implies that the
average Singaporean should not be in the dire straits they are in
now.
But the undeniable fact remains that Singapore today is no where near
being the Switzerland of the east. You may refer to the attached
powerpoint file for a full comparison between Singapore and
Switzerland. The census figures show many similiarities between the
two maturing economies but the following figures are glaring;
a) Singapore's unemployment rate of 4.8% is still higher than
Switzerland's 3.7%.
b) The Singapore Government's reserves of Foreign Exchange and Gold
is approx USD110.8 bn, much higher then Switzerland's USD69.6 bn.
c) Singapore's physical geographic area is only 692.7 km sq which is
only 1.67% of Switzerland's 41,290 km sq
d) Singapore's population is at 4.3 mio as compared to Switzerland's
7.45 mio
e) Taking into consideration (b) and (c) above, Singapore's Military
Expenditure is USD4.47 bn p.a. (4.9% of GDP) as compared with
Switzerland's USD2.5 bn p.a. (1% of GDP).
There are massive indicative signs that confirm the postulate that a
very bloated state reserve is maintained at the direct expense of the
personal well being of private citizens. Military Expenditure is just
one glaring area where the Singapore Government spends more then 500%
more to defend a land area less then 2% the physical size of
Switzerland.
We posed these issues on Delphiforums as discussion threads and have
incorporated feedback from various forum participants. More crucial
differences between Singapore and other developed countries was
highlighted by one forumer:
"Unlike Singapore, Switzerland, US and UK have the following;
A) UNEMPLOYMENT BENEFITS. This is state funded. A Swiss who is
unemployed for the first year can still draw 80% of his original
salary from the State in the 1st year. Of cause he has to show he has
actively been looking for work;
B) From (A) there is some certainty of income and security. The state
actually looks after the aged and the unemployed. In sillipore its
the citizens who have to financially support the government, its GLCs
and their mistakes.
C) There is CPF in Switzerland but the funds are managed in a clear
and transparent manner. There is no such shit where GLCs can dip
their hands into state reserves;
D) The Swiss and US and UK have a less bloated cabinet then
Singapore. They do not have to pay ministers USD1.1 mio a year to
spin them propaganda;
E) Switzerland also spends less then 1/2 what Singapore spends
(USD2.4bn as opposed to USD4.2bn) on defence and this is to defend a
land area and population more then 7 times the size of Singapore;
F) Switzerland already have carved a niche in the following
established global industries: a) Private Banking b) Insurance and c)
Chemicals/Health care and d) Precision tooling and watches. What
industry has our million dollar ministers carved? The Biopolis? Pls
don't make my toes laugh."
(You may view the full discussion thread at:
http://forums.delphiforums.com/sammyboymod/messages/?msg=62281.1)
Are Singaporeans living with the mistakes of previous attempts by the
government at "social engineering" and playing God?
According to the latest estimates from the Straits Times article, if
you decide to retire at the age of say 60 and have a life expectancy
of 80 years, you would need at least SGD1 to 2 million in cold hard
cash. Needless to say this is beyond the means of most Singaporeans
who earn an average mean/median monthly household income of between
SGD3,000 to SGD4,000/-.
That means that most Singaporevereans will face very bleak retirement
years with a substantive reduction in quality of life and standard of
living. As one forumer sums up:
"unless you have cold hard cash of at least SGD1-2mio at retirement,
this is what our twilight years will look like for most of us :
a) Downgrade from private transport to public transport. Imagine at
age 60 running for bus or MRT;
b) Downgrade to 2-1 room HDB flat (also affectionately known by the
locals as "Pigeon Holes") assuming this is still affordable in 20-30
years time;
c) No holidays overseas and no clubs;
d) No entertainment. Entertainment is watching grass grow and a once
a yr visit from a PAP ministar.
e) No friends, not mobile, no credit card, no gym etc.
f) Food is bread & water, no restaurants no nothing.
g) And of cause NO KIDS and other long term liabilities we can't
afford "
(You may view the full discussion thread at:
http://forums.delphiforums.com/sammyboymod/messages/?msg=62281.1)
Singaporeans will be living hand to mouth in what are supposedly
their golden years. After spending all of their adult lifes working
12 hour work-days, they will have barely enough to live out their
sunset years at subsistence level. Some may even face the undignified
prospect of flipping burgers at Mac Donald's to make ends meet.
And this is a situation the government is well aware of. Said MP Lily
Neo: "People are living longer, life expectancy is about 80. So if
you retire at 62, you still have a long way to maintain yourself. The
majority of people don't have enough savings."
According to Dr Neo; "Medical costs will go up as new technologies
and medicines are developed. As you grow older, you'll have more
medical needs that will add to your expenses."
http://newpaper.asia1.com.sg/topstories/0,4133,TopStories-
1100793540,00.html
If this is the case, would lt not be morally and socially
irresponsible for a government to encourage its citizens to assume
obligations and responsibilities (of having children) that are beyond
their financial capabilities?
Why are they doing it? That's because Singapore's only real growth
engine is its population. And the government needs to see a growing
mass population to fuel its economic growth. This is strangely
reminiscient of the scene in The Matrix where humanity is reduced to
the plight of a duracell battery.
Below was the sinister scenario potrayed by another forumer:
"Things have changed alot in singapore and not all the changes are
positive. The following is simple logic. We start on the premise
(given by Lee Kuan Yew himself) that Singapore has no natural
resources.
The only resource it had 30-40 yrs back was man-power. So the govt
could only sell one thing and one thing only.....manpower to attract
foreign investments.
Fast forward 3-4 decades later and little has changed. We still have
only manpower to selll and what's worse is the fact that other
countries are fast catching up in that area.
The only thing the PAP can think of is to keep the price of its only
product cheap. Make this place as attractive as possible for the MNCs
but that also means exploiting the labour market to its fullest. That
means squeezing every last drop of blood from workers (run those
duracell batteries dry!!!)
This is a situation the PAP is quite happy with but there is one big
kink. They never foresaw the obvious eventuality that their pro MNC
anti-labour policies has made life so difficult for average workers
that it has resulted in a mass exodus of talent from the island and
also a massive drop in birth rates. In effect they are killing their
only scarce resource.
The idiots were so oblivious to this development that 10-15 yrs back
they even had a stop at 2 policy and also the infamous Graduate
Mother scheme policy. The message to the masses; "If you do not have
a degree please do not contanminate the pure stock with inferior
genes." Only graduates were fit to have kids. And to this day this
unholy idea has survived as we see the distinction between SDU and
SDS.
I can say with certainty that singaporeans (the intelligent ones) who
plan their future will have worked out the numbers for themselves and
they know they do not have enough to retire comfortably especially if
they have kids. So you will not see a reversal in the plumetting
birth rates.
The PAP also realises it so they now look to foreign imports to make
up the shortfall. But who wants to move to a Disneyland with the
death penalty where you work 12 hour days in a sterile pressure
cooker society where your every move is monitored and controlled?
Only the desperate cases.
If you had money and talent Singapore would be the last place you
would move to. Sure you may set-up a bucket shop office here to take
advantage of the cheap labour and even work here. But to live here
personally, retire and call this place your home? No Way. That's why
most of the mega rich businessmen still live even in Indonesia, China
and even Thailand and of cause Switzerland. All of these countries
have a higher concentration of high networth people then Singapore
(and that includes Indonesia, Thailand and China, supposedly lagging
behind singapore).
So my final point is that there is no future for this island unless
there is a real change of policies (and government)."
Fortunately most levelheaded Singaporeans are able to see beyond the
short term incentives offered by Singapore's ruling party and many
have questioned the feasibility of raising a family on this expensive
island in the sun.
Said another long time forumer:
" Singapore's mass media have always afforded us a very enthusiastic
picture of our future, especially via reporting of key messages from
our leaders.
Is the picture really that beautiful? Civil servants getting big
bonuses! Was there a hidden agendum somewhere? Does that really
assure us of the bright horizon ahead? I really have my doubts.
Can Singapore really establish itself as a key hub? Even if it
succeeds, how long can that be? Just looking at Thailand and
Malaysia, and I get a funny feeling down my spine. sigh......"
Another forumer was less kind when he wrote:
"million dollar ministers and million dollar permanent secretaries
naturally can't see that "relatedness"' [between affordability of
retirement and making babies] you mentioned.
Why? Because you see in Singapore these policy makers can only
understand an issue in its proper perspective only when they are
personally affected. or afflicted as in the case of illnesses. [How
can ministers who earn SGD1.6 mio a year understand and relate to the
plight of a family who has to survive on a monthly household income
of SGD3,000 a month?]
If a system of compensation of paying Ministers currently exist ,
based upon benchmarking against the top 5 earners of the community
regardless of ""how"" they earn their money( remember rogue trader
Chen of CAO was the 4th top earner in the list) then what can we
expect from them? logical thinking? Nah!
And really why produce another generation of media and state
socialised unthinking unanalytical slaves for THEM and their pre-
assigned elite status children?"
Conclusion:
It looks like for now Singapore's battery producing factories (oops I
mean baby making families) will be closed for the duration and the
Matrix (oops I mean the Singapore Government) will have to look off-
shore for other sources of raw material for the reproduction process.
Needless to say these alternatives are already being explored.
Acknowledgements:
The editor wishes to express her thanks to the participants in
Delphiforums who have contributed substantively by providing feedback
and view points for this article.
Non-Members of Delphiforums may enter the discussion forums
as "Guests"
(You may view the full discussion thread at:
http://forums.delphiforums.com/sammyboymod/messages/?msg=62281.1)
Attachment: 34k (application/vnd.ms-powerpoint) Singapore
Switzerland.ppt
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MORE LIES AND DECEPTION FROM YE PROPAGANDA STATE CONTROLLED MEDIA;-
| Thursday June 15, 2:17 PM | |||
Singaporeans have right attitudes towards retirement: survey
Results of the survey were released at a forum on retirement organised by the Institute of Policy Studies. Of the 1,000 Singaporeans interviewed for the survey, 58 percent said they opposed a mandatory retirement age, while 41 percent agreed with the proposition that the one thing the government should do was increase the retirement age. Another significant finding of the Singapore survey was the importance people placed on relationships and fitness. Some 85 percent of the Singaporeans surveyed felt that having loving family and friends was the most important thing to achieve a happy old age, while 75 percent thought keeping fit was important. The IPS chairman, Professor Tommy Koh, said Singaporeans, like their American counterparts, shared the virtue of self-reliance. A total of 64 percent of Singaporeans surveyed felt that individuals should bear most of the costs of their retirement and hence emphasised the need to be prepared for their retirement. The figure among Americans was 66 percent. Professor Koh emphasised that demographic trends will make Singapore the second most aged society in Asia after Japan. In 2005, there were close to 300,000 Singaporeans over the age of 65; by 2030, this figure is projected to rise to 873,000. Hence, it is important for Singaporeans to focus their minds on the concept of retirement and the challenge of helping older citizens to keep fit and stay healthy, and to save enough for the retirement years. - CNA /ct | |||
Offline 
Send Email