Our hard-earned CPF savings...
-
Originally posted by βÎτά:
I am disappointed in you, being a scholar I expected much more from you.
In a long time horizon, most stock markets make returns of 10% to 15% annually.
Insurance companies who receives fix premiums from the insured uses these funds to invest in the stock markets and other investments. When the insurance contract matures, the insurance company pays out the interest of maybe 6% to the insured, the rest of the profits goes into paying out expenses and dividends to shareholders. Insurance contract like CPF is not liquid, if you choose to withdraw early, you might not even get back the initial money you put in.
Who is the ultimate shareholder of CPF? The government or the people?
Who took the risk? The people or the government?
If say tomorrow, all the investments in Temasek and GLC is worth nothing.
Do you think CPF will have problems paying out all the CPF money to retirees as they fall due? Why do you think US has no problems paying out it's mountain of debt? I heard the printers can churn out billions a day.
All they ever need to do is get MAS to increase the money supply (welcome to fiat currency) which raises inflation. Who suffers when inflation is high? The government or the people?
Why have a cap for those with accounts less than $30k from investing to get more returns? Why not have a capped for those whose accounts are in excess of $30k and let them make 3% interest; and those who have less than $30k make 5% interest?
I think Hong Kong's MPFA is a much more equitable organisation, it has finance professional to educate investors about the kind of investments they should take and let the investors make their own choice. The gains and losses are of no consequence to the organisation, they don't make or lose any money from the investment choices of investors. While CPF pays a flat nominal interest rate which is manipulated by itself (In a way, because the government has all the cheap funds it needs from CPF, no need to raise interest rates to obtain funds; who sets the interbank rates in Singapore which in turn dictates the CPF interest rates.) and exploits the CPF balances of the poor. It's like "The Ring" it comes full circle. 厄�循环
Yet again, you totally missed the point of contention, not to mention that your conclusions on the market are without your own calculations and analysis with figures to show right here. Some say 8%, some say 10%. Wow!
But who cares about what you think?
I only care I took profit for all my Singtel lots yesterday. Can buy back next week for a lower price liao.
I also only care that this year's saving target reached liao before mid year point. This target is the one used in the graph above.
Finally, I also only care that going to get another salary hike soon, and that I will be donating a little bit of the extra hike to community chest.
So you can think what you like and type long posts that totally miss the point. Doesn't bother me.
-
gentlemen and women,
every man and woman have their rights to live and invest as they like, i think we have tor respect that, in this world, in term of peoples, there is alway a class differentiation, be it in term of money or status or knowledge that divided the classes, no society can take that away, but if we will to learn to respect each other integrity and forgo the class, i think we will be more gracious, harmony and less insulting of each other.
I hope the above is clear.
You do not need to tell people what you are doing...keep it to yourself is better, but if you really want to expose yourself or show your egos and proudness, you must also be willing to take in comments and critics.
-
Originally posted by eagle:
Yet again, you totally missed the point of contention, not to mention that your conclusions on the market are without your own calculations and analysis with figures to show right here. Some say 8%, some say 10%. Wow!
But who cares about what you think?
I only care I took profit for all my Singtel lots yesterday. Can buy back next week for a lower price liao.
I also only care that this year's saving target reached liao before mid year point. This target is the one used in the graph above.
Finally, I also only care that going to get another salary hike soon, and that I will be donating a little bit of the extra hike to community chest.
So you can think what you like and type long posts that totally miss the point. Doesn't bother me.
Miss the point of contention? I thought you said that it was fair that CPF pays 2.5% (Ordinary Account) and 4% (Special Account)?
What matters most is that you reach your investment target, you get your raise and promotion.
-
"What matters most is that you reach your investment target, you get your raise and promotion.
"Guess he lives all his life just to get that, hope it materialise, otherwise....
-
Originally posted by βÎτά:
Miss the point of contention? I thought you said that it was fair that CPF pays 2.5% (Ordinary Account) and 4% (Special Account)?
What matters most is that you reach your investment target, you get your raise and promotion.
Since you want to look dumb...
1) Point out exactly where I said 2.5% was fair. Which sentence. Go on. Most of times, funds in the OA isn't inside anyway. It's not even worthy to use as comparison for 30 years investment. You still want to say you didn't miss the point of contention?
2) Guess your data was based on which country? Which country was I talking about? Have you calculated for our local index?
3) The article took 1926 to 2001. 1926 was near the bottom, and 2001 was near an interim top which is very near to current levels. Basically, they can take 1926 to 2010 and the same start and end data would be used.
4) I asked about your own calculations and analysis. You showed me other people's analysis. Huh?
5) You failed to address if our govt have the ability to secure more than 8% over 30 years. Did you take into account our government's track record in overseas investments?
6) You failed to take into account that a percentage of cash must be set aside, hence the full amount of gain will never be possible by any funds. Even if they can secure 8% on 80% of the funds, the overall result would be only 6.4% gain.
Fair comparison? Seems like you never even bother to use some brains.
-
Originally posted by angel7030:
"What matters most is that you reach your investment target, you get your raise and promotion.
"Guess he lives all his life just to get that, hope it materialise, otherwise....
Another person that can't read.
25 years old till 35 years old. All my life? Hmm. Try again.
-
u talking to me?? omg! STI up liao..
-
Another person in illusion that STI opens on Sat
*shakes head*
-
of course the system has affected our lives in every way....depending on the interventionist attitude and intensity....(that includes chewing gum)..
surely their big fat and ever increasing salary cannot rest on the laurels .... cannot think of a way also must think and solve the peoples' problems....
-
its quite outrageous they can change the policies whenever they want, to suit them. its like a social contract since we dun have welfare policies here. that means we work hard and when we are old, the money we earned need to be returned to us for us to enjoy our twilight years. sure a dozen old fogeys squandered their wealth thru gambling, womanising, investments and so forth, but the majority are not like them. so the policy maker uses this excuses or rather justification to amend their policy, so that we can live our age till when we die. so if we cant take out our money from CPF, who benefitted the most?
-
I just want to know why I cannot take all my CPF money out when I turn 55.
Really.
-
Originally posted by charlize:
I just want to know why I cannot take all my CPF money out when I turn 55.
Really.
because they just changed the policy.
-
Originally posted by Rooney9:
because they just changed the policy.
Why oh why?
-
Originally posted by charlize:
Why oh why?
simple because they are in power. what can we do? suck our thumbs -
Originally posted by eagle:
Since you want to look dumb...
1) Point out exactly where I said 2.5% was fair. Which sentence. Go on. Most of times, funds in the OA isn't inside anyway. It's not even worthy to use as comparison for 30 years investment. You still want to say you didn't miss the point of contention?
2) Guess your data was based on which country? Which country was I talking about? Have you calculated for our local index?
3) The article took 1926 to 2001. 1926 was near the bottom, and 2001 was near an interim top which is very near to current levels. Basically, they can take 1926 to 2010 and the same start and end data would be used.
4) I asked about your own calculations and analysis. You showed me other people's analysis. Huh?
5) You failed to address if our govt have the ability to secure more than 8% over 30 years. Did you take into account our government's track record in overseas investments?
6) You failed to take into account that a percentage of cash must be set aside, hence the full amount of gain will never be possible by any funds. Even if they can secure 8% on 80% of the funds, the overall result would be only 6.4% gain.
Fair comparison? Seems like you never even bother to use some brains.
I am not a scholar, you being a scholar, I guess you can make me look dumb or call me dumb. It's your inalienable right to call me whatever you want.
1) You did not explicitly say that the interest rates paid by CPF is fair, but you stated it implicity on 4 Jun 7:01am. This topic being CPF savings I guess it must be about the 4% paid by CPF in the Special Account. Unless you are talking about something else altogether, then I might have misunderstood you. So I ask you again now to clarify.
Do you think that the 2.5% (Ordinary Account) and 4% (Special Account) interest paid out by CPF is fair?
Also, if your funds are not in the Ordinary Account, then you cease to make interest on that amount. Simple?
2) You used STI, so I guess Temasek and GLCs invest ONLY in Singapore?
3) Are you sure 2001 is the highest point in NYSE?
9/11 rings any bell or were you too young then? 4) I am not qualified to give calculations and analysis, so I used an abstract from a book, the book is quite old, that's why it only goes up to 2001. At present I agree that all major markets are trading in the lower range due to the fallout from US subprime. But when we look at investments, we shouldn't take specific ranges when it's high or low, we should always take a long term perspective.
5) Whether the PAP government is able to secure 8% or more is irrelevant, if they had employed proper qualified professionals for the job, the issue of low returns would not have materialized. Employing an engineer (daughter in law) who used to run ST to make economic decisions?
If they can't get better than 8% returns, perhaps they should put their funds with Berkshire Hathaway. Wait I forgot, all our funds is state secret. 6) Cash must be set aside?
Really? Think again. Yes. I don't have a brain like yours, you are a scholar remember, I used to work in a coffee shop as an assistant.
-
eagle,
If you think that CPF is fair to all Singaporeans, maybe you should respond to my earlier post directed to you. If you think CPF is unfair to all CPF holders, then please omit the post below.
I am disappointed in you, being a scholar I expected much more from you.
In a long time horizon, most stock markets make returns of 10% to 15% annually.
Insurance companies who receives fix premiums from the insured uses these funds to invest in the stock markets and other investments. When the insurance contract matures, the insurance company pays out the interest of maybe 6% to the insured, the rest of the profits goes into paying out expenses and dividends to shareholders. Insurance contract like CPF is not liquid, if you choose to withdraw early, you might not even get back the initial money you put in.
Who is the ultimate shareholder of CPF? The government or the people?
Who took the risk? The people or the government?
If say tomorrow, all the investments in Temasek and GLC is worth nothing.
Do you think CPF will have problems paying out all the CPF money to retirees as they fall due? Why do you think US has no problems paying out it's mountain of debt? I heard the printers can churn out billions a day.
All they ever need to do is get MAS to increase the money supply (welcome to fiat currency) which raises inflation. Who suffers when inflation is high? The government or the people?
Why have a cap for those with accounts less than $30k from investing to get more returns? Why not have a capped for those whose accounts are in excess of $30k and let them make 3% interest; and those who have less than $30k make 5% interest?
I think Hong Kong's MPFA is a much more equitable organisation, it has finance professional to educate investors about the kind of investments they should take and let the investors make their own choice. The gains and losses are of no consequence to the organisation, they don't make or lose any money from the investment choices of investors. While CPF pays a flat nominal interest rate which is manipulated by itself (In a way, because the government has all the cheap funds it needs from CPF, no need to raise interest rates to obtain funds; who sets the interbank rates in Singapore which in turn dictates the CPF interest rates.) and exploits the CPF balances of the poor. It's like "The Ring" it comes full circle. 厄�循环
-
Originally posted by angel7030:
u talking to me?? omg! STI up liao..
haha STI up on saturday. Which country again?
-
2.5-3.5% for the main CPF account seems pretty low for a developed nation considering that returns from provident funds in countries like Msia, India and Australia are higher by at least 1.5%.
-
Originally posted by βÎτά:
I am not a scholar, you being a scholar, I guess you can make me look dumb or call me dumb. It's your inalienable right to call me whatever you want.
1) You did not explicitly say that the interest rates paid by CPF is fair, but you stated it implicity on 4 Jun 7:01am. This topic being CPF savings I guess it must be about the 4% paid by CPF in the Special Account. Unless you are talking about something else altogether, then I might have misunderstood you. So I ask you again now to clarify.
Do you think that the 2.5% (Ordinary Account) and 4% (Special Account) interest paid out by CPF is fair?
Also, if your funds are not in the Ordinary Account, then you cease to make interest on that amount. Simple?
2) You used STI, so I guess Temasek and GLCs invest ONLY in Singapore?
3) Are you sure 2001 is the highest point in NYSE?
9/11 rings any bell or were you too young
then? 4) I am not qualified to give calculations and analysis, so I used an abstract from a book, the book is quite old, that's why it only goes up to 2001. At present I agree that all major markets are trading in the lower range due to the fallout from US subprime. But when we look at investments, we shouldn't take specific ranges when it's high or low, we should always take a long term perspective.
5) Whether the PAP government is able to secure 8% or more is irrelevant, if they had employed proper qualified professionals for the job, the issue of low returns would not have materialized. Employing an engineer (daughter in law) who used to run ST to make economic decisions?
If they can't get better than 8% returns,
perhaps they should put their funds with Berkshire Hathaway. Wait I
forgot, all our funds is state secret. 6) Cash must be set aside?
Really? Think again. Yes. I don't have a brain like yours, you are a scholar remember, I used to work in a coffee shop as an assistant.
1) The point of contention was about CPF SA all along. Where did you even see 2.5%?
You told me I said it was fair for 2.5%. Where? Don't try to twist away.
And I have explicitly talked about 4%. Guess you didn't even bother to read properly again.
2) See. You missed the point of contention. Who were we talking about in the first place?
3) You understand what is the meaning of interim top? Another post that totally missed the point (yet again, any surprising?) about comparing with 2010 and statistics,
4) Using outdated info? How much dumber can you get?
5) Missed the point again. Try again, do you need to me point out to you exactly where you missed the point?
6) Explain. Take into account an aging population.
If you think that CPF is fair to all Singaporeans, maybe you should respond to my earlier post directed to you. If you think CPF is unfair to all CPF holders, then please omit the post below.
I replied you with 6 points which you have read. And we were talking about CPF SA all along. If you want to talk anything else, I'm not interested.
-
Originally posted by eagle:
1) The point of contention was about CPF SA all along. Where did you even see 2.5%?
You told me I said it was fair for 2.5%. Where? Don't try to twist away.
And I have explicitly talked about 4%. Guess you didn't even bother to read properly again.
2) See. You missed the point of contention. Who were we talking about in the first place?
3) You understand what is the meaning of interim top? Another post that totally missed the point (yet again, any surprising?) about comparing with 2010 and statistics,
4) Using outdated info? How much dumber can you get?
5) Missed the point again. Try again, do you need to me point out to you exactly where you missed the point?
6) Explain. Take into account an aging population.
I replied you with 6 points which you have read. And we were talking about CPF SA all along. If you want to talk anything else, I'm not interested.
1) Surely you know what is the meaning of implied, already responded to your question but you don't seem to get it. Maybe I misunderstood you, that's why I asked again.
Do you think the CPF of 2.5% (Ordinary Account) and 4% (Special Account) is fair? You always sidetrack and omit all my questions, surely you understand the punctuation mark "?".
2) What is the topic of this thread? If you want to talk about your smart invesment choices, maybe you should open another thread. This thread is specifically about CPF savings.
3) Sorry, I don't do technical analysis, I think it's pure hogwash.
4) Yes I am dumb, you are smart.
But your replies don't seem to tackle all my points, just alot of sidetracking and insults. 5) Another false accusation and more insults. But you circumvented the whole issue.
6) Set aside? Geez! I was talking about funds in the OA earning 2.5%, if you cash is set aside or purchased a property, surely you don't expect to earn interest on it right. You really got me here with your profound maths and technical analysis.
You give very vague explanations for all your theories, then proceed to call those who rebut you stupid. Is that what being a scholar means?
-
nvm la.....to each his own. Everyone sings a different frequency, we can't change everyone. Just make sure your vote counts in the coming elections :)
-
Originally posted by Rock^Star:
nvm la.....to each his own. Everyone sings a different frequency, we can't change everyone. Just make sure your vote counts in the coming elections :)
If all of us get a chance to vote.
-
Originally posted by βÎτά:
If all of us get a chance to vote.
hmm that's true lol. 66.6% is a mandate, according to PAP :) Doesn't matter if more than half the populace did not vote.
-
Originally posted by Rock^Star:
hmm that's true lol. 66.6% is a mandate, according to PAP :) Doesn't matter if more than half the populace did not vote.
According to them it's a strong mandate, not only a mandate.
-
Originally posted by βÎτά:
1) Surely you know what is the meaning of implied, already responded to your question but you don't seem to get it. Maybe I misunderstood you, that's why I asked again.
Do you think the CPF of 2.5% (Ordinary Account) and 4% (Special Account) is fair? You always sidetrack and omit all my questions, surely you understand the punctuation mark "?".
2) What is the topic of this thread? If you want to talk about your smart invesment choices, maybe you should open another thread. This thread is specifically about CPF savings.
3) Sorry, I don't do technical analysis, I think it's pure hogwash.
4) Yes I am dumb, you are smart.
But your replies don't seem to tackle all my
points, just alot of sidetracking and insults. 5) Another false accusation and more insults. But you circumvented the whole issue.
6) Set aside? Geez! I was talking about funds in the OA earning 2.5%, if you cash is set aside or purchased a property, surely you don't expect to earn interest on it right. You really got me here with your profound maths and technical analysis.
You give very vague explanations for all your theories, then proceed to call those who rebut you stupid. Is that what being a scholar means?
1) This is not about side tracked. You have yet to say which sentence implied.
Don't tell me you don't have the basic ability to finish one thing before starting on the next?
Which sentence did I imply about 2.5%. I'm still waiting. As long as you cannot show the sentence or post, you are basically just talking rubbish.
2) My chat was primarily with Calvin. Who were the people we were referring to?
If you want to talk about something else related to the thread, but totally unrelated to my discussion with Calvin, sorry, I'm not interested.
3) It's not even technical analysis. You raised statistics via your so called research. I showed you back statistics.
Get your facts right. Oh ya, wonder if you could read. I have already mentioned the word statistics.
4) Your sentences are all out of point. There's no point to start tackling at all because they don't even fit the point of contention here. And sorry, I'm not insulting you. I merely state a fact of you that you admitted too. How is that insult?
5) You missed the whole point because we are talking about GIC being able to earn 8% and pocketing the difference of 5%. You tell me whether they can secure 8% is irrelevant.
How much more out of point can you get?
6) Geez, which post was I referring to the OA at all? All along, I was referring to the SA.
And I have already told you the OA isn't even worthy of comparison.
Out of context yet again.
Vague explanations? I didn't even bother to explain to you unlike to Calvin because all your points aren't even into what my discussions were with him. There wasn't even any explanations, so I can't even see how you could see vague explanations.
If you like to start on something else that isn't related to my discussion with Calvin, I have already told you I'm not interested.