PAP Still Doesn’t Want To Let Singaporeans Know What They Are Doing With Our CPF

The Ministry of Manpower (MOM) has responded to the previous expose article on the CPF:

(You can watch the video of this article here:

The MOM conveniently side-stepped these issues:

(1) When you sell the property after 30 years, the so-called “profits” will still be lesser than the accrued interest. And if you have to put the profits back, that means all the money in cash that go out of your hands. This is money that you cannot use, because can you take your CPF out? Effectively, are you actually earning from the sale of your property? The PAP might say your property is your investment to earn from, but with the accrued interest, do you think they actually want you to earn?

(2) The MOM has conveniently chosen to side-stepped the issue of why the CPF Minimum Sum had to grow by more than 10% in some years when inflation was only growing by 1%. Why did they force Singaporeans to keep more in the CPF Minimum Sum when inflation grew by much lesser? Why did the PAP want Singaporeans to retain more than what is necessary, to trap our CPF in?

(3) Also, if the MOM is so concerned about inflation, then why does the PAP only give 2.5% on the CPF, when this is barely enough to cover for inflation, and in some years, is lesser than inflation, which means that the real value of our CPF is actually diminished?

If the PAP is really concerned, then the PAP should start doing what is right first – pay Singaporeans higher interest rates. Otherwise, the PAP’s double-standards stance (finally) only exposes their hypocrisy behind how they want to pay little for Singaporeans and make Singaporeans pay more for them.

The MOM has responded because they know they have to – they have no choice. We’ve forced them to. But this response is neither relevant nor answer the specific questions. The PAP continues to want to hide the truth and not admit to Singaporeans what they have used our CPF for.

Why are Singaporeans forced to forfeit our CPF to the PAP? Why are they choosing to hide information of “OUR” CPF from Singaporeans?

Because the PAP has chosen not to properly response, we can see once and for all that there is something they are trying to hide and our CPF is being played around with by them.

What is the PAP trying to hide?

You can read their response here:

See the illustration of their response here:



  1. eric

    l. Why is sexispideR aka The ‘heart’ truth trying to hide or create? It is well known that our cpf enables us to buy a property which we benefit greatly from. My sister recently brought a singles flat and she paid in full with her cpf. Without cpf, how can the average singaporeans own a flat? I have many friends and relatives who profit from HDB, but of cos with Ray’s anger with the pap, he ignored this fact. What Roy is trying to do is playing a dangerous game with our life’s, Roy is trying to gain momentum and support in trying to topple the govt. Dear Roy if anyone toys with our flats, our life’s, singaporeans will Never forgive you. Sexispider don’t you ever dare toy with our lives just.because you hate the pap.

    • Sgcynic

      “I have many friends and relatives who profit from HDB, but of cos with Ray’s anger with the pap, he ignored this fact.”

      Eric, Eric, Eric. Poor sod doesn’t understand your friends and relatives are only profiting from their own children and the next generation. Profit “from” the HDB? Raiding from the reserves you mean? Who put that Idiotic idea in that cranium of yours?

      • Sgcynic

        Yes, idiot. I would rather my descendants pay the same price as I did and your descendants to pay mutliple times what I paid. We would buy and sell you ok? We give yours 10% market subsidy. LOL

    • Ho Chong Loong

      Hey, eric, it is “bought” not “brought”. And CPF does not enable us to own a property because the money does not come from CPF board. Put it this way, if I do not put money with CPF, I can put with a fixed deposit in a bank. Same, same, ultimately, it is I who enable myself to buy a property by having the discipline to save. NOT CPF board. Don’t be confused bozo, eric.

  2. Hard Up



    • Sgcynic


    • Ho Chong Loong

      Hey, HArd Up, which part of your body got hard up? Why don’t you resign from your job to go carry balls for PAP?

  3. anonymous

    1. Why are we suppose to share our CPF retirement fund with property purchase?
    2. Shouldn’t retirement fund be a separate capital from property fund? (Wouldn’t our retirement funds be gone if there is meltdown in property market?)
    3. If we sell away our only property (for retirement), where do we live?
    4. If everyone is selling their property for retirement, who are the buyers? Younger gen of Singaporeans?? So the profit is actually coming from younger Singaporeans??

  4. eric

    Oh is Sexispider a.civil.servant??? Wtf? He kept whining abt the govt like sg is the worst country in the world but works for the government? Than what’s the ‘fear’ this ‘fear’ that he kept whining about? In the private sector, let’s see how long will anyone last if they kept whining abt their employer in the public.

    • Sgcynic

      Wtf? 3 PAP IBs here? Already Qiu Yung and IB friend launched their desperate defence trolling the MOM posting against the negative comments there? Let’s take out our popcorn and see how they try to stop the tide. LOL

  5. Tan Hock

    Roy is not stupid. He is energetically and persistently driven and focused on instigating emotions of the less informed folks for the purpose of creating mayhem. IMHO, he is probably vengeful becos of some physical and mental damages somewhere along his troubled life so far.
    His “high frequency” and high persistent activities focus on spins which could sell well to gullible folks. In terms of real substances, he has little credibility which is why he has to make-up with continuous distortions and BS.

    • Ho Chong Loong

      Hey, Tan Hock, we need more energetic guys like Roy to bring down the PAP. His views are certainly a breathe of fresh air. While it may not be 100% accurate, but seeks out to tear down the core of PAP through exposing dirty deeds and lies masquerading as the “hard-truths”. The PAP government has absolutely no right to enforce CPF saving if it is not able to deliver its promises. Where is the Swiss standard of living? The PAP of now is one of shifting goal posts and making up excuses for its deficiencies in governance. If you refer to the past record, CPF interest rate was 8.5%. HDB cost $30,000. A father can raise a family of 5. People are able to seat comfortably on MRT trains. Everyone got a good paying job. The PAP of now is rotten to the core I tell you. Roy is doing a service for the nation by tearing down the PAP. Good job. Keep it up, Roy.

      • Tan Hock

        Hey Ho Chong Loong, you may support Roy and his deluded thoughts and views which in my book is full of distortions and misrepresentations of realities. He certainly is not speaking for many (in my view, most) Singaporeans. Personally I reject his notions and frankly, his misrepresentations of stats for the purposes of instigation. Yes there are certainly rooms for improvement for the nation and its people. Yes we must continuously strive to get the relevant authorities to work for the betterment for the people. But NO to Roy’s ploys of vengeful and self-destructive nature.If you think Roy is doing a service for the nation, i suggest you are sorely mistaken. As for tearing down PAP, he is probably demonstrating “how not to do it credibly”.
        As for delving in past records of 8.5% interest rate and 30K$ HDB, we can also pick on 10K$ house, 50$ bowl of noodle, and 10cts bus ride, and more…. Then there were rattling and shaky buses, open drains, and families of six sharing 2 slices of bread for breakfast. As for the current 2.5-4% returns vs the hindsighting range of 8 -16%, what can Roy safely guarantee for fully secured and practically riskless case? What are the realistic alternatives achieveable for the common folks and in practical terms without hindsighting? His BS-ing is definitely not done with the good intention for the betterment of society, but in my book for his own selfish agenda. To such falsehood, good riddance.

      • Ho Chong Loong

        Hey Tan Hock, we can always agree to disagree. The PAP also engages in distortions, misrepresentations, double speaks, half-truths, fallacious arguments, etc. Play dirty with dirty. I don’t care if instigation or not, if the authorities up there are rotten, then no way we can work for betterment without replacing the people in charge. Roy is very efficient at that. You can continue to delude yourself that the current PAP is looking after its people. I have seen it through. The ploys, the media control, the propagandas and porlumpa grassroots in the busload. Who is the greater evil? A corrupted nepotistic, cronyistic party in control of the government or an individual trying to bring it down?

      • Tan Hock

        Ho Chong Loong, robustness and ruthlessness in politics are inevitable and to be expected. At the end of the day, credibility and sustainable rapport with the people would be tested in the ballots. You may bitch and whine at unfair or foul plays, but suggest you give the common folks credit to see thru it eventually. Wild rhetoric like yours are the real self-delusions and excuses for your own inadequacies. If you or associates are truly up to the marks and have what it takes, go forth and challenge for the mandates with your own merits. Suggest you dont rely on crying “fouls”, “unfair”, and drumming under the guises of victimization etc. ….. they were foolish and ineffective, and will remain so. I should concur here that Roy is very efficient in so much as to depict his troubled mind going haywired and yet not realizing the common Singaporeans are probably not buying into his BS. Current PAP may have rooms for improvement and there are probably a few slip-ups by them. In my book, what Roy is constantly whining about offers even more chaos and destruction rather than a genuine effort for improvement.

      • Ho Chong Loong

        Tan Hock, that’s where our differences lie. You refuse to see the elephant in the room and choose to use a magnifying glass on a small little spider. There is nothing rhetorical about what I have written. Cut your false pretence about standing for common folks for by writing here and giving your two cents, you do not represent the “silent” majority. The delusion is in you for your slip up in labelling a major incompetency as minor inadequacy coupled with “a few slip-ups”. You can carry on to whine about Roy’s every article and nit-pick on his every statistics. But your blind faith like fellow city harvest church followers is clear for all to see. BLIND.

      • Tan Hock

        Ho Chong Loong, Your derivations surely testify your wild and weak premise. Stats extractions for abusive purposes can be demolished via fundamental analysis. In Roy’s cases, he is just basically incompetent even at the fundamental levels.
        Perhaps this is probably why he is not achieving any credential in real life.
        Your derivatives are even more deplorable as depicted by your tangential reference to City harvest church.(Btw which i have no interest whatsoever). I suggest your pure hallucinations should be minimized.

      • Ho Chong Loong

        Tan Hock, well, what competency do you have except porlumpa and making ad hominem attacks? If you are so good at your fundamental analysis, why am I reading personal attacks labelling others “vengeful”, “selfish”, “abusive”, etc, instead of any fundamental analysis to demolish Roy’s analysis? Carry on your assaults if you think that will aid your cause at helping the PAP. People like you is synonymous with hypocrisy.

      • Tan Hock

        Ho Chong Loong, probably like you, Roy is mentally damaged and challenged to realize that his number fudges are fundamentally in conflict with any accounting, economics or financial groundings. Besides MOM, others have pointed out his devious flaws and he is persisting in his insinuations, Roy and you should be aware of those articles whereby his treatments or abuses of static data sets led to wrong inferences. They are not worthy of serious discussion for his devious intentions were never there in the first place. What I find disgusting is his disingenuous motive under the guise of social activism. He is the real falsehood or hypocrisy which we can do without in Singapore. If you are in the same “bed” as Roy, go on with your self-destructive bliss. Any sensible person, singaporean or otherwise need not have to be defending PAP (which you seem to be obsessed with) to appreciate your kind of madness. BTW, i wish to see serious and robust challenges to the policies of PAP, definitely not this sort of self-damaging antics. If you insist on pursuing this wrong alley of accusing anyone with differing views as supporting PAP, then I said this brutally…..GO F…. yourself…

      • Sgcynic

        Aiyo, why bother to reason with Tan Hock? To him, distortions and misrepresentations of realities are robustness and ruthlessness in politics and are inevitable and to be expected. I kinda agree with him -corruption by those in absolute power is inevitable and to be expected… The proof is in front of us, for those with eyes to see.

      • Tan Hock

        aiyo Sgcynic, your ” I kinda agree with him -corruption by those in absolute power is inevitable and to be expected…” is created fool yourself by your very own shallow mind. Dont try to insinuate that you have my agreement on that.
        As for your ” The proof is in front of us, for those with eyes to see.”… selective vision must be your obsession and favorite past-time. Try using a little brain cells….pls

      • Ho Chong Loong

        Tan Hock, if everyone who do not think like you are mentally damaged, that could only mean one thing — that your mum dropped you when you were a child, resulting in your hallucinations, insinuations. It is laughable that you keep spewing rhetorical accusations, almost like a broken recorder, without pointing out what is exactly wrong with Roy’s article. Any sensible person reading your comments would be able to see through the hollowness in your thought process. If those were converted to sound, I bet it would be a grating noise like that of a door rotating on its old, rusty hinges.

    • Sgcynic

      Aiyoh, even if you are not blind, you don’t have enough brain cells to intercept what little sight you have. LOL. Piss.

  6. John Koh

    My flat was under reposition 5 years ago. Now I live in a studio flat flat fully paid.we need to take care of our own lives. Don’t wait for handouts or complain. Now I wait for my minimum sum draw out date in five years time. Many like me would be in worse positions if not for CPF or minimum sum. There are good outcomes too! Work hard…


    The CPF life scheme is just an annuity insurance policy to allow the CPF to make your money dwindle to hardly anything after 20 years or how generous the agency is,till you drop dead.Even though the payout is about 7%,you are better off with buying Hyflux bond at 6% coupon payout as at the end of 20 years,the money is still there, not dwiindle next to nothing.Moreover if the CPF is getting a return of more than 7%,it means they are paying you peanuts but keeping your money from you legally(?) Its really a devious way of snatching someone’s money and making him/her grateful for it. The lousy excuse is that if they dont do it their way with your money you may squander it in Batam or at the integrated resorts.In that case why dont they sell government retail treasury bonds with 20 years tenure and 7% payout since they are able to get 16%ROI. The initial intent of the CPF was good till they kept too much of our money for retirement. Unable to roll it without risking losing it, they had to jack up the housing market,the education costs,the medical costs to absorb the CPF money.The lousy excuse again is you can afford them.Yes you can pay the costs but leave very little for retirement and old age medical costs.

    • Sgcynic

      Be careful when governments and organizations claim to “unlock” value. When the government unlock the value of land, REITs unlock the value of rents, Saw Phiak Hwa unlock the potential of SMRT’s station space

  8. Pingback: Daily SG: 14 Apr 2014 | The Singapore Daily

Leave a Reply to eric Cancel reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s