I Have Just Been Sued By The Singapore Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong

Hello everyone, I am Roy Ngerng. I am an ordinary citizen in Singapore who believes in speaking up for my country and my fellow citizens. Over the past 2 years, I have written nearly 400 articles about what is happening in Singapore. I have advocated for a fairer and more equal Singapore where every Singapore and every person in Singapore can be taken care of and protected by our country. As of today, there have been nearly 2 million views on my blog. Today, I received an email from Lee Hsien Loong’s lawyer. I am being sued for defamation. I have tried my best to speak up for my country. I have tried my best to advocate for my fellow citizens. However, today, I am sued by the very government which should be protecting its citizens, such as me. This is disappointing. I have reproduced the letter that has been sent to me in this blog. The letter was sent by Davinder Singh from Drew & Napier. In this article, you will see:

  1. The letter in JPEG format.
  2. Other relevant articles which exposes the Singapore government’s working.

I have exposed many truths about the Singapore government and how they have intentionally planned since 1984 to gun down on Singaporeans. Today, I am finally being silenced. It is disappointing that the government has decided to turn against ordinary Singaporeans. 318368 Letter of demand 18May2014-page-001a Letter of Demand Page 2 edited
318368 Letter of demand 18May2014-page-003 318368 Letter of demand 18May2014-page-004 To know why the government is on my heels, you need to read the following articles to find out why:  Truth Exposed: The Dirty CPF-HDB Scheme To Trick Singaporeans When The PAP Started Turning Against Singaporeans Traced SHOCKING Facts About Our CPF in Singapore! (Part 1) SHOCKING Facts About Our CPF in Singapore! (Part 2) How The Government Undercuts Singaporeans’ Wages Singapore: First World Economy, First World Costs, Third World Everything Else It is only right that as citizens, we stand up for our country and we stand up for one another. It is only right that as people, we stand and fight for our freedoms. When faced with tyranny and treachery, we have to remain strong and united, and fight the wrongs that are wrought upon us. For our future, for our rights and for our families and children, we need to stand and fight. It’s time we stand united. It’s time we fight. Also, on 7 June, we will be organising an event to demand to the government to #ReturnOurCPF. It’s time we stop the Ponzi scheme for tearing apart our lives. Return Our CPF Colour Boxes 2b@English

Advertisements

722 comments

  1. redvaliantstarlight

    If there is nothing to hide, just show hand to quell all suspicions, not just to Ngerng, but to all Singaporeans and silent all your critics once and for all. Ask every Singaporean and you will see that almost everyone has some form of reservation and uneasiness about Lee HL being the PM and Chairman of GIC, and his wife, the chairman of Temasek Holdings. The whole of Singapore/s wealth are literally in ther hands, alone!

    Why so is so much political and monetary powers concentrated in the hands of the Lees?
    Open the books and show us that you are clean. If you don’t why blame others for being suspicious?

    • may

      Agree. Just open up the books. Relinquish control of CPIB. Then direct the CPIB to investigate. Remove Temasek Holdings from exempt private company status and allow auditor to check. Get auditor to declare the company is not another PA. Why take the easy way out to sue if you have nothing to hide?

      • Dearden

        I agree it is an easy way out. But since when did people or organisations or governments purposefully take the harder way out when the outcomes are the same? Its like you’re telling the government, no, the individual, PM Lee, to be less efficient. That is lame? He is suing on the basis of personal defamation. Get that right.

      • Jason

        There is no disagreement on CPF, PM Lee is not suing Roy based on his opinions of CPF, rather, he is in his personal capacity and asking him to remove a post that personally attacked PM Lee, nothing to do with CPF.

      • may

        This is about gaining trust of the people. Servant leadership. Suing is akin to silencing the doubters and telling the people you are the master. Two different outcomes, my friend.

      • may

        @Jason, there is no defamation. Only suspicions of corruption. But PM choose to interpet it as defamation. If he has nothing to hide, open himself up for independent CPIB investigation. No ordinary Singaporean can prove he is corrupted as long as he is still in power. To bully a blogger with lawsuit is certainly not gentleman way. Obama would not do that. Real leaders lead by example and convince their follwers. Lousy ones use the law to suppress people.

      • may

        @Eric. No, not just one blogger questioning, 40% Singaporeans did not vote PAP because all questioned about it. It is easier to open the book than to sue 1.5 million of us.

      • Johnson Koh

        This is what Roy actually wrote:

        Meanwhile, something bears an uncanny resemblance to how the money is being misappropriated.
        (infograhpics)
        Channel NewsAsia had reported that, “The court accepted that there is evidence to show that the monies were moved from the church to the various firms to generate a false appearance that the church’s investments were redeemed. The judge said the six had been dishonest in the use of the money.”

        This is what Drew and Napier wrote:

        5) Below that chart, you repeat what you say is the quote from the learned Judge with the words “false appearance” and “dishonest”. You also say that “Lee Hsien Loong is the Chairman” of GIC.
        6) The article is understood to mean that Mr Lee Hsien Loong, the Prime Minister of Singapore and Chairman of GIC, is guilty of criminal misappropriation of the monies paid by Singaporeans to the CPF.
        7) This is a false and baseless allegation and constitutes a very serious libel against our client, disparages him and impugns on his character, credit and integrity.

        From what I understand,
        5) Is a FACT
        6) Is a strawman argument leading to
        7) A trumped-up charge against a false proposition that doesn’t stand.

        This is, and has always been, the common tactic engaged by PAP politicians to silence their critics for pointing out something of national importance. The PAP followers not only fail to read properly, they also blindly accept whatever accusations their master hurl onto their opponents.

        The fact is presented here for everyone to see. Mr Roy never accuse the PM guilty of corruption. This has to be determined by the court. Lawyers that cannot read should have their license suspended.

      • Sam Wong

        I fully agree with Johnson’s comment.
        Mindless PAP supporters always write mindless things.
        If the court is unbiased, there is no case to be answered.
        The PM, as a head of state, should not be entitled to a defamation lawsuit.
        As a PM, he has all the nation’s resources behind him from SPH to MediaCorp, to launch his rebuttal if he truly believe that he has been unfairly criticised. Yet, he chooses to launch a defamation suit. Reminds me of TT Durai and how some ministers had supported him initially. This is unbecoming of a leader, if you ask me.

    • Anony

      GIC as a holding is a profit based company. Have you ever seen a financial report from an MNC or organisation that reflected more than they should? Even more so, a bank or investment fund’s? One that is beyond the basic BS/P&L/CFS? Anything beyond that is confidential and equivalent to a breach of corporate data. Anyone in the finance depts. would know that a show hand means showing the WORLD the financial weakness/discrepancies and detailed use of funds of a corporation. You’re probably telling everyone including competing nations, what singapore is worth and where their investments lie, opening us to possible economic attacks from such nations to alleviate Singapore’s competency as a dominant power in Southeast Asia. PEOPLE LIKE YOU SPEAK WITH NO BRAINS. Such cumbersomeness is the reason why you people are here complaining against the meritocratic society you are currently in. I have never seen a well-studied and capable individual suffer beyond that of first-world problems in Singapore as of yet. If you are neither, then you know why, and stop blaming the government. Be glad you arent doing construction or laborious work thanks to ITE which is the governments’ way out for less studious individuals. Have you compared yourself with other people in other nations? NO GOVERMENT IN THIS WORLD IS FULLY TRANSPARENT. Not because they dont want to, but they cant. Imagine what happens when Singapore opens its doors to you, its also showing hand to Malaysia, Indonesia, Australia, basically the whole world. USE YOUR BRAIN.

      Plus in the context of banks, when you place a deposit in a bank (Somewhat similar to CPF), you earn an interest rate. This is a compulsory savings programme by the government, that reaps you HIGHER interest rates than any commercial bank in Singapore. Do not shift away from the fact that this is a savings programme, SO HOW THE MONEY IS BEING USED HAS REALLY NOTHING TO DO WITH YOU? All you need to know is if your deposits are safe right? DO you question DBS/HSBC/BOC on how they use your deposits? YOU DONT. SO WTH ARE YOU ASKING THE CPF FUND FOR. As long as you get your money back at the end, you cant complain. Plus this mandatory savings helps us responsible people not be liable for the future beggars or weaklings in society that are unable to depend on themselves and call for government aid when theyre old.

      • Mosh

        Anony, blardy hell. If we have million of dollars in our DBS/HSBC/BOC bank account and we are not happy with the way the bank handles our money, we can always chose to close the account. But I only have one question for you; if we are not happy with the way government is handling our money, do we have an option to close it? Answer this for yourself. And let’s not dwell on mandatory saving, the government has always been known to seek fortunes in citizens’ everyday woe – traffic jam – apply ERP, too many cars – invent COE, etc, etc. And there are people who was in their 30’s many years back plying hope to withdraw their CPF but when it gets nearer, the implement a new retiring age to 55 if I am not mistaken. And these poor people who when almost reaching 55 are hit by new 62 years old retirement age. The CPF may well be our mirage to death. I don’t think you have many friends who are in dire straits like the majority of us, your life dwells in the upper classes of silver and gold, so shut your blardy prick.

      • David Chew

        Those counties that provide education to their citizens will be given up to at least grade 10 to 12 education (equal to GCE O or A in Singapore). However our Government start streaming at the age of 10 year old & determined their education path with complex system such as Foundation (EM3) in Primary School, Normal Technical & Normal Academic in Secondary School & etc. Can you tell me what is the equivalent level for GCE N in globalization standard? In Singapore, NT GCE N can only enter Nitec in ITE but NA GCE N can enter Higher Nitec in ITE but in term of employment in Government/Public Sector, they are offer the same grade & salary which I question why is there a double standard? If everyone have the same system, at less everyone is a grade 10 to 12 graduates regardless how good of bad his/her result was,

      • may

        That’s a very naive assessment. Even Abu Dhabi fund is properly audited. Without audit, how do people know the money is there? What if they misreported and added an extra 0? Singapore sure collapsed if people find out.

      • sianzboi86

        Also another point to note, it is the role of the government to contain inflation. Just like it is their duties(which they proclaimed) to grow our economies.
        Containing inflation(costs) is as important as growing the coffers(profits).
        it is the basic concept of how a company runs, so I dun See the point whereby the inflation becoming higher than the money they safekeeping for us.
        Since the economy is growing, isn’t it safe to say that the money they safekeeping and social safety net Should grow proportionately? Until the point whereby when we retire and take out our cpf money, we do not have to worry about the inflationary costs, because the gdp generated will improve social safety net and ensure us that our money does not get impact from the inflation costs which they Should be controlling.

      • L T

        I totally agreed with Anony….!!
        Be contended…. … our government has done a great and excellent job to keep the country prosperous and safe and corruption free. Without the force saving of CPF……We will not have any saving at all!😢 Thanks to our government’s effective policies that we see our country and citizens prosperous and enjoy the fruits of our ancestors’ hard labour. My thanks to the our government !

      • Sgcynic

        “Without the force saving of CPF……We will not have any saving at all!”
        Isn’t that an indictment of the low-cost labour policy and high cost environment created by the PAP government?

    • Anony

      AND BY THE WAY. You have but a small city nation with a population of ~6m. The reason why the Lees hold such political influence is because your government structure does not constitute one as large as the USA or CHINA? In that case, can you really blame the Lees for having been at the prime spot for the past few decades of when, expanding the government would mean redundancy? If you tell me now that PM Lee is stepping down, your SGX stocks, money in the bank, investment ratings, political stability will all be diminished immediately. The purchasing power of your singapore dollar will immediately buy less overseas than right now. That is a sure thing.

      I dont think the government is blaming the people for being suspicious? In fact, its the ingrates who accuse the government who are blaming the government and being suspicious. Use the word Blame appropriately.
      Likewise, the government are only taking action to ensure they are not defamed, or in this case, PM Lee’s reputation. Don’t blame him for suing when you already know you aren’t in a free-speaking nation. Your rights are limited to a level of individual freedom, but not more than one that affects others. And that may be bad for some, but I find it more than enough, because it has created such stability, law and order in this country. So unless you can find a more efficient country than Singapore, other than Iceland which by the way at least has some natural resources, and a much smaller and less competitive population, I suggest you stop whining.

      • sianzboi86

        I think you are mistaking the cpf and the banks.
        Cpf is a forced savings schemes whereby u do not have any say in the investments use of ur money. So the least the stakeholders can do is ask the financial standings and the right to get the Accounts audited.
        In the case of the banks, you have the right to choose to withdraw your deposits If you find that the banks seem shady and you don’t feel safe depositing your money with them.
        So your comparison between banks and cpf dun hold because it’s 2 different systems altogether.

      • sianzboi86

        I don’t agree with the saying that the purchasing power will diminish when there’s a change in gov.
        How can you say for sure that the next better player cannot maintain?
        changing of government doesn’t mean a change in the civil service sector.
        There’s only a change in management and the civil service still runs as per normal.
        You are using the fear factor to silence the people into submitting to the current system.
        All systems fail, even great dynasties and kingdoms fail. So I dun agree that a change in government will mean a fall in Singapore.
        It Just means that the current batch is not as good as the competitor.

      • Anony

        @sianzboi86
        I am not mistaking the CPF or banks. I am comparing them and for you to say they dont share the same comparisons, I think you are mistaking me. SInce i already mentioned that this savings scheme is a forced one. As it is forced, it is obviuosly a government based action. SO why are these people unknowingly judging the CPF on bank criterias, when like you said, you know the category it is in? I am not being condescending, but only showing these people what it means when they expect higher interest rates from their CPF funding. The funds or earnings from investment by over sovereign fund, either go back into national coffers or into government expenditure on the economy. When the money is being packed to the CPF, it is the governments responsibility to shelter it from inflation and also to maximise that capital. CPF takes money out of the circular flow of income, but redirects it into government expenditure for added investment power. If the government doesnt do anything with the money, other than ‘safekeep’ it till you’re old, this savings scheme would be the dumbest laughing stock in the world because it would be worthless by the end of a few decades (inflation). SO how can people expect heightened CPF interest rates, much more, ones that are similar to the earnings ratio of over sovereign fund, like what this blog’s author has been exclaiming??? Besides that, does the author not know that regardless of rain or shine, the CPF interest rate still applies? But GIC’s investments dont. So as a citizen i fully believe that the government isnt being unfair here. Correct me if im wrong or you have a different point of view.

        AND yes I agree that a change in government MAY NOT affect our purchasing power in the LONG RUN only. However, as with all arguments, if you wish to put forth an opinion for change, you need a recommendation. And not a recommendation of ‘TO CHANGE THE GOVERNMENT’, but a recommendation of WHO you are referring to replace the existing politicians in this context. Identify me someone at this point that is more capable than PM Lee for this position. I am not using the Fear Factor, I am using rationality and reason. If i somehow induced fear, it is fear of the unknown and not fear of the PAP. Likewise, if you didnt know, a change in the political power in Singapore WOULD cause adverse reactions in the foreign investors’ eyes. And also wavering investment interest and concern within the domestic economy because policies change with their leaders. So on what basis are you arguing that the change will NOT adversely affect our economy? Please provide more details as I do not think you are wrong, just that you are using very normative statements.

      • sianzboi86

        Let’s make it a simple point.
        There is not a winner capable enough yet to take over the government. So why worry over the unknown?
        I do not think that a change in people at the top running the country will change the current system.
        That’s all.

      • sianzboi86

        Also, you mentioned that safekeeping is a laughingstock.
        We do not choose to invest in cpf because it is our choice. Rather it is a forced scheme, so the risks definitely has to be as low as possible to prevent any potential losses to our precious monies right?
        GIC is not investment funds, the risks they undertake Should not be high because it is not their own money that they’re investing isn’t it?
        Also the point that they contribute funds back to the coffers, I do not even know what is the amount of returns they make from our cpf monies, I can’t debate without proper evidence. Sorry about that.

      • sianzboi86

        Also another point to note, it is the role of the government to contain inflation. Just like it is their duties(which they proclaimed) to grow our economies.
        Containing inflation(costs) is as important as growing the coffers(profits).
        it is the basic concept of how a company runs, so I dun See the point whereby the inflation becoming higher than the money they safekeeping for us.
        Since the economy is growing, isn’t it safe to say that the money they safekeeping and social safety net Should grow proportionately? Until the point whereby when we retire and take out our cpf money, we do not have to worry about the inflationary costs, because the gdp generated will improve social safety net and ensure us that our money does not get impact from the inflation costs which they Should be controlling.

      • lim

        I believe Saddam’s iraq was more “stable” than what they’re experiencing now.

      • Alan

        Is there any difference between PM Lee’s current suit and that of TT Durai’s inital suit who successfully sued his original complainants suspicious of his luxurious spending at NKF ? If you have the integrity, you would open up all the books for all to see instead of taking the first step to sue someone into silence ? Now that foreign professor Balding even made certain statements that calls for more scrutiny regarding CPF funds investments but why didn’t our PM sue that professor ?

        So many questions have remained unanswered until now regarding our CPF funds and yet our PM sees no urgency to address these doubts & suspicions but choose instead to use his vast resources at his disposal to quickly sue someone who only sees it his responsibility to raise further doubts especially when our PM’s wife is on the other receiving end in control of our CPF funds ? Is our PM saying that no Singaporean or CPF member has any right to raise any questions or doubts regarding our own CPF funds irrespective of whether any related suspicions holds true or not ?

    • dirty mouth

      you are a fake Singaporean. why don’t you expose the Wayang party. you are staging a great Wayang.I salute mr lee hsieng long. you deserve more than being sued. if I am the i pull your pants down. expose your true intention.

    • Anony

      I am not mistaking the CPF or banks. I am comparing them and for you to say they dont share the same comparisons, I think you are mistaking me. SInce i already mentioned that this savings scheme is a forced one. As it is forced, it is obviuosly a government based action. SO why are these people unknowingly judging the CPF on bank criterias, when like you said, you know the category it is in? I am not being condescending, but only showing these people what it means when they expect higher interest rates from their CPF funding. The funds or earnings from investment by over sovereign fund, either go back into national coffers or into government expenditure on the economy. When the money is being packed to the CPF, it is the governments responsibility to shelter it from inflation and also to maximise that capital. CPF takes money out of the circular flow of income, but redirects it into government expenditure for added investment power. If the government doesnt do anything with the money, other than ‘safekeep’ it till you’re old, this savings scheme would be the dumbest laughing stock in the world because it would be worthless by the end of a few decades (inflation). SO how can people expect heightened CPF interest rates, much more, ones that are similar to the earnings ratio of over sovereign fund, like what this blog’s author has been exclaiming??? Besides that, does the author not know that regardless of rain or shine, the CPF interest rate still applies? But GIC’s investments dont. So as a citizen i fully believe that the government isnt being unfair here. Correct me if im wrong or you have a different point of view.

      AND yes I agree that a change in government MAY NOT affect our purchasing power in the LONG RUN only. However, as with all arguments, if you wish to put forth an opinion for change, you need a recommendation. And not a recommendation of ‘TO CHANGE THE GOVERNMENT’, but a recommendation of WHO you are referring to replace the existing politicians in this context. Identify me someone at this point that is more capable than PM Lee for this position. I am not using the Fear Factor, I am using rationality and reason. If i somehow induced fear, it is fear of the unknown and not fear of the PAP. Likewise, if you didnt know, a change in the political power in Singapore WOULD cause adverse reactions in the foreign investors’ eyes. And also wavering investment interest and concern within the domestic economy because policies change with their leaders. So on what basis are you arguing that the change will NOT adversely affect our economy? Please provide more details as I do not think you are wrong, just that you are using very normative statements.

      • sianzboi86

        Also There isn’t a need to pit forth a recommendation.
        The people’s voice and votes will speak louder than what we have here.
        It’s a democratic process afterall.
        Cheers. =)

      • Sianzboi86

        1 last point to note before i stop replying all posts.
        An adverse effects will onli trigger when the new incoming government announces a change from previous policies. If they continue as per normal, what adverse effects does the change brings?
        Lets not dwell into the details and lets just says its all in the democratic process of majority rules.
        Cheers. =)

    • Roy

      I read your articles and your claim that you are an ordinary Singaporean and that you speak up for ordinary Singaporeans . I am an ordinary Singaporean too and I think your articles are very one sided and do not speak for ordinary Singaporeans . Many of your articles are biased and do not state the facts as you claim they are. I see that your articles are aimed at attacking the government . If your articles are to speak for ordinary Singaporeans why did you not mention the good work the government has done too ? Clearly your articles are biased and one sided , thus don’t proclaim that you speak for ordinary Singaporeans, and that you are fair and just . You know you are not , and people reading your articles know that they are just one sided . Being sued can actually be a good thing for you , at least you can now sit back and think and admit that you have been one sided in your articles.

  2. Wee Teck

    I think if you choose to publish lies and stir up misguided resentment towards the government you should be prepared to face justice. Your articles were in no way truthful or trying to tell the truth.

    Why try to stir up dissentment towards the government when they had in fact done a good job? If people believe your lies, and it causes harm to the function of the government or worse impair the judgement or the people. In the end you’re harming the people by turning the people againstva good government

    • zrixes

      Totally agree! The amount of truths in this blog is negligible. Please, Roy. If you want to make a legitimate claim to your story, atleast provide ‘credible’ evidence to make your case. Presenting poorly sourced evidence will only land you trouble.

      Also to echo Wee Teck’s comment, why stir dissentment? We’re all Singaporeans afterall. Your actions are totally unnecessary, unless… you have some underlying motives that we’re unaware of?

      • Jason

        Everyone has underlying motives. The only way Roy can get many followers is to produce sensational articles, that are mostly untrue. I’ve been following most of his articles from even before the CPF debates, I can tell you that a lot of them are not true. Most probably has good intentions, but it doesn’t have evidence and data. And even when he does have data, he likes to misrepresent them and manipulate them.

        The common man on that reads his articles will think that he is telling the truth, but dig deeper and you will see that his arguments are mostly based on false pretences or bad comparisons(apples vs. oranges).

      • L T

        I totally agreed with zrixes and Wee teck’s comments ! Why stir dissentment towards the government when they have in fact done a good/ GREAT and excellent job??? We are all Singaporean and should be proud of the government. ……look at our country! Which country that we can find a better and safest place than here; SINGAPORE! ??

    • Bleach

      At the end of the day. Whatever he has post and which has been read by many, it depends on the individual whether they want to believe it or not. I belief when money is on the line everyone gets edgy. In the current livings, even provision shops have hiked their prices up and all that. I guess everyone wants to know what is happening to that 20% we are contributing every year? It is quite difficult to live in singapore nowadays mainly because of the recent issues with transportations. I just belief once in awhile the govt should surface and tell the people of singapore what is happening and reassure them that the money will be seen when they retire. Of course this is my POV and everyone is entitled to theirs. Things could be better.

  3. Nigel

    Regarding the four points you will be raising for the event on 7th June, I would only support the third point which is to be transparent on where the Government is spending my money be it win or loss, no investment is a sure win of course!

    The first point on pegging the CPF rates to what Temasek Holdings and GIC (considering both are our country’s reserves) earns is equivalent to having no reserves at all, no?

    The second point on having no minimum sum and allowing citizens a full withdrawal would most probably result in ‘people’ spending unnecessary stuff or losing all of it gambling or investing thus resulting in more problems. People get poorer, people blame the Government on not giving social security etc which begs the question, should the people get poor in the future due to the withdrawal of their CPF and spending it away ‘accidently’, will you be willing to pay for their monthly expenses or will you prefer them to withdraw from their CPF monthly to support themselves?

    Haven’t reached the age of getting monthly pay outs from my CPF so can’t comment on your 4th point.

    The above is purely my opinion whereby I feel the Government is indeed doing a good job just that I prefer to know how they spend my money (besides the HDB grant, baby bonus, edusave, hospitalisation grants, 2 years of free electricity, food, water, allowance, and ‘clothes’, etc) that’s all.

    Please feel free to comment and I stand corrected.

    Cheers.

    • Jason

      I think not many people realise that if we allow everyone to fully withdraw out everything from CPF, most of them WILL gamble their savings away or go on holidays and whatnot. This leaves them with NOTHING to retire with when they are old. Then who is expected to support them once they have spent away their savings? Me? You? If these people who want to withdraw everything can sign an agreement, saying that they won’t ask for handouts from taxpayer’s money, then I won’t mind. But the fact is, after enjoying themselves and bankrupting themselves, they will then turn on the govt and the people and demand that we support them, how is that fair?

      • Nigel

        That is exactly what I’m driving at and that’s the question I’m asking Roy. Will he want to pay higher taxes for social security so as to support those who withdrew all their CPF and lost them all.

      • pictograph

        Its so funny that your IB people are camping on this page all day? How much are you guys paid??? No proper job? What people wants to do with their own CPF money is their freedom, its not something that you or your PAP boss need worry about.

      • Jar

        Yeah what people want to do with their CPF is their freedom, but after “doing and spending” their CPF away, am I gonna support them with higher taxes? BLODDY HELL NO! human nature is ugly, and if there is free money, many people will cheat and that’s equivalent to future financial ruin…

      • Papa Jones

        agree that what people want to do with their money is their problem. after spending all the money, please dun camp on the street and start irritating people begging for money. or sit on a wheel chair when they have perfectly working legs and asking for sympathy. worse off leaving off charity like it their bloody birth right.

        People complain but never use brain. come on think before you speak.

      • Jason

        Im sorry to disappoint you @pictograph. But Im not a PAP IB. Im a man with opinions, is there anything wrong with that? And I’m having f-kin holidays. Im from one the local universities and its holiday period. I want to spend one or two weeks watching anime and catching up on tv shows after mugging so much. Cannot ah? Please la, if you disagree, come and DEBATE LA. Why must hide and say I’m a PAP IB? Do you know that for a fact? Do you know that Im actually a Reform Party Supporter and that I’ve volunteered with him on walkabouts? Don’t know right? Come and debate instead of just shutting me out and labelling me as a PAP IB.

      • sianzboi86

        Let me ask 1 simple question.
        Is our money another entity’s money?
        Cpf is a saving schemes aimed at helping singaporeans retire I agree.
        But do not forget that it is the individual’s contribution towards his own retirement funds.
        Not a handout from the pension schemes to support them when they retire.
        There is an intrinsic difference between the two.
        You guys are confusing the social cost of supporting the retirement due to pension funds vs individual’s withdrawal of the personal retirement funds.
        Cpf works like a mutual fund and insurance concept, whereby you invest your own money and they generate returns for you until the maturity you get the principal amount back.
        Pension schemes are the costs of the. working population contributing to the centralised funds channelled to the retirees for their retirement.

      • sianzboi86

        By saying that the cpf is the reserves of the country is conceptually wrong.
        My money doesn’t mean it is my country’s money.
        Because I work hard to earn my own bread and butter. The country’s reserves Should be from the taxes and revenues generated from the GDP,GNP, income tax, etc…
        By taking our cpf money and investing in investments it is only right to account to us and return us the money fully.
        They take our money to help us save. So isn’t it the same as safekeeping the money for us? When the time is up, they Should return the principal amount + all returns they made to us. It is not their money in the first place. Any returns Should not be considered as reserves.

      • Jason

        I agree with you @sianzboi86.

        CPF is not a pension fund. Nor is it a handout. Which is a GOOD thing. If people are allowed to anyhow withdraw money from CPF, then they will not have enough for retirement, agree? Then if they have not enough for retirement, what will they ask for? More money of course, because they have wasted their savings, now they will ask the government for more handouts and more social security. Then who will pay for all these handouts? Taxpayer’s money of course, my money and your money too. You willing to give your money away? Im not.

      • sianzboi86

        I disagree to the point whereby people gamble away when they have money.
        Asians we are more inclined to gambling, I do not dispute that. But, how a person uses his money has got nothing to do with the government.
        After squandering away his assets, he’ll ask more money from government.
        I think This point is something debatable because this person who squandered away his money May Or May not act according to how we determined him to be.
        We’re not God, so how can we say for sure that This will happen?
        Also, This person who squandered away his money has to be responsible for his own actions. Being penniless doesn’t entitle him to another round of incentive payouts from government.
        Passing a law to stop This phenomenon is what a government Should be doing.
        Educating the people on how to spend wisely Should be the way to go. Not acting Almighty and restrict the withdrawal of their money.

      • sianzboi86

        Why is it call a retirement fund?
        It means that you do not work to generate income anymore and This Should be the time whereby you use ur retirement funds to pass time.
        But when you think from the perspective of the cpf, This means that they will relinquish control over This amount of money.
        Is There a conflict of interests?
        Food for thought.

      • sianzboi86

        I’m not advocating for more social spending to the people.
        But a government who controls the country’s economy via GIC and banks should take care of it’s own people right?
        No matter how you look at it, cpf is our own money, the government never has a part in it.
        The debatable part about the investment returns by the government Should be deemed as the rightful returns of the principal amount borrowed to invest right?

      • Jason

        @sianzboi86

        I actually agree with you on certain points. Minimum sum and CPF should have and opt-out scheme. Want your money back early? Sign an opt-out form and agree that no matter what happens, the person who opts-out is no longer eligible to any sort of financial aid. Then yes, I won’t mind at all actually. They can now do what they want with their CPFs, and have no right to my tax money once they run out of money to play with. I don’t care if they die. But some people will care, and that runs the risk of them increasing my tax in order to save these people, which I am against.

        I also agree that the CPF returns can be a little higher. maybe 5-6%. But the fact is, most of the returns from GIC already goes into our reserves and surpluses. GIC itself contributes about 7 billion in our yearly budget surplus. So the money actually does come back to us.

      • sianzboi86

        Also another point to note, it is the role of the government to contain inflation. Just like it is their duties(which they proclaimed) to grow our economies.
        Containing inflation(costs) is as important as growing the coffers(profits).
        it is the basic concept of how a company runs, so I dun See the point whereby the inflation becoming higher than the money they safekeeping for us.
        Since the economy is growing, isn’t it safe to say that the money they safekeeping and social safety net Should grow proportionately? Until the point whereby when we retire and take out our cpf money, we do not have to worry about the inflationary costs, because the gdp generated will improve social safety net and ensure us that our money does not get impact from the inflation costs which they Should be controlling.

      • sianzboi86

        Sorry for the double postings. Can’t seem to find the correct reply buttons to reply.

      • Unhappy Singaporean

        The retirement funds held by that govt is too much and who will live till that age…
        I believe majority will not…
        after all years of hard work, I trust that we, people deserve to spend our hard earn money.
        Govt kept saying plans for singaporeans, I feel that the plans are more for themselves.

      • Dick

        My understanding of cpf minimum sum or cpf life scheme is as follows,
        50% payable at age 55 and another 50% payable at age 65 deducted from your cpf account.
        Monthly retirement payout start at age 65 till death.
        Do you know that in the event of early death, example at age 70, what will be your refund from this scheme?
        My understanding is that you will only get the balance of $155K minus off the monthly payment already received. The interest of payment from age 55 and 65 accumulated till death at 70 goes into a pool to pay for others that live longer. If we do our sum, you will know that if the $155K remain in the cpf retirement account generating 4% annually, this amount should see us thru 90 years of age. Why then do we need this scheme If life expectancy is 80 years of age as per survey. Upon death, our main concern is our immediate family, why is our interest generated from age 55 to 70 not given back to us? I personally can’t agreed with this scheme, why can’t we just leave the $155K in the retirement account to see us thru our old age. In order to win you will have to live thru 100 year of age to benefit from this scheme.
        Think about it, who is paying to look after the old, not the government it is your money.

      • Alan

        Frankly under the CPF scheme, our PAP Govt is actually making use of CPF funds of those who die earlier to fund the retirement of those who happen to live a longer life. It is almost like robbing Paul to pay Peter just because people like Peter happens to have a longer lifespan than the average. Another way of looking at it is that the Govt is trying to relieve itself of any further responsibilities from caring for those with little savings.

        The CPF scheme is now been manipulated & morphed from being originally a basic retirement scheme to one now base partially on life assurance plan. If this has been PAP’s agenda, it should rightfully affect those who join the scheme later or for those who wants to join to opt-in but not those who have been a CPF member for 2 or 3 decades only to be told that their entitlement to withdraw at age 55 has been withdrawn without any consultation.

        And to add insult to injury, the Govt pays a very low return to CPF members compared to what they been earning as what they boasted as being the achievement of our PM’s wife. Or is this what is happening in reality as questioned by so many experts? One can’t simply have the cake and eat it at the same time but refused to provide details to back themselves up.
        Nobody likes to feel cheated. Why should GIC/Temasik be entitled to keep the bulk of the profits while CPF members are the ones providing the seed monies ? Anyway if GIC/Temasik do suffer any losses, it is not as if the CPF members are already not bearing the losses by virtue of their lowly rate of interests paid out to them. And why should our MInisters end up being the beneficiaries when profits are up and they declare themselves obscene bonuses when GDP is up ?

        So many questions and yet no answers, is it not time that our leaders be more honest with us ?

  4. Jc

    Your struggle for freedom of speech is highly commendable, on hindsight you should have made sure whatever you said doesn’t hit back on you. In other words, cover your arse! No matter what, try to survive this round, so that you can fight for tomorrow. Most important thing is to stay afloat, and tread carefully this time!

  5. Annoyed

    You aren’t every smart. Please don’t say you are speaking for us. You are just using us to make it seem as if we support you by speaking up.

    You don’t even know about City Harvest Case. Plus so far the government is doing a good job. if you are not happy you can try migrating to other countries and see how your life will be “better”

      • fanny lee

        *pictograph, please do not show your incompetence in having a proper conversation/friendly debate. By calling everyone who does not think along the same lines as you an IB clearly shows your immaturity. Please don’t waste our time here, making us read your senseless whines. Thanks.

  6. ah beng

    Do a crowdfunding…i am sick of this CPF thingy. Its a good cause…but not flexible enuff in times of needs.

    • Jason

      Yes, I agree with you. CPF is actually a good savings scheme, without it, many people may not be motivated to save for their old age. Yes, I also agree that CPF should be more flexible in helping those who are temporarily out of a job and to help people in times of medic crises as well.

  7. defennder

    Hi Roy,

    I’m sorry to hear you’ve been issued this letter of demand from PM Lee. If anything it shows that the establishment considers you a force to be reckon with. One trait I find detestable about Singaporeans is how they mock and gloat at others just to feel superior to them. You can see it in full display in this thread.

    Do give utmost priority to your well-being. Whether you may be in the wrong or not, if it helps yourself to apologise and issue a retraction, please give it serious consideration. It’s always better to live on and fight another day. Cheers and be well.

    • Sgcynic

      I support Roy. Great to hear from defender. Missed your articles.

      Let me use some vulgarity here (censored by the MSM). PAP the PAP IB!

    • fanny lee

      I believe there are many people here who aren’t full pap supporters nor opposition supporters. But they support One Singapore. I would like to think many of us here with deferring views on this issue and “fight” so fervently is because we love our country.
      But how autocratic and narrow minded some people here must have been to be calling others names simply because we don’t think the same way. Just because some us do not think like you do, we are traitors and “sinkies”?
      To May, please get out of the country more and travel. Hope that will broaden your mind a little. Do have an open mind to think that not all people who have different views from you are against you.
      For me, I’m just For responsible publishing. If you want to blog about certain “truths”, please back it up with facts. Be responsible. Thanks.

  8. Pingback: Be careful what you say on the Singapore Prime Minister’s Facebook Page! | weehingthong
  9. Roy Tan

    U should stand firm on your beliefs instead of giving in so easily!!!!

    We, as fellow Singaporean will be supporting behind you and see whether u will be the one to be sued for bankruptcy or jailed for standing up for your own human rights and freedom of free speech!!

    Come to the worst and if anything fail, we will still hailed you as our Singapore Hero 🙊✌👍👍

  10. Papa Jones

    Bo Liao. Should have seen it coming. Now backside kena burn already then think of putting butter. If got any brains at all should have know better to leave out the name and just put the organisation. By putting the name, it become a personal attack. Worse of all, you have to choose the baddest ass in this country. You complain about your money going to the wrong place, now you see how this wrong place money is going to destroy you and maybe your families and your future generation. Just like the Emperor of Ming Dynasty decimating the entire bloodline of anyone who dare go against him. Man you are so so dead.

  11. Peace

    sorry to hear that u have been sued. I believe in freedom of speech and that you have your right to say stuff.

    the increase of MSS increases every year. i somehow feel that it is necessary.
    1. higher demanding salaries of the public.
    2. Increase in prices of everything in Singapore. If i have to retire with a minimum sum of $80,000 (in 2003) in my CPF, that would be quite jia lat.

    Lets take a look at how its calculated.

    Bulk of the MSS is actually accountable for rental and income for retirement, Hence, if we have that addressed, we need not set aside for minimum sum.

    Therefore,

    1. If i have a property, my minimum sum would cut by half.
    2. If i have an annuity that covers me for the half of the amount set aside from MSS minus of the property,

    i need not set aside MSS.

    Singaporeans have to responsible for their own retirement. Its about striking a balance. Some of the govt schemes actually do make me feel angry at times like the COEs and taxes. But these are income for the country which would be returned in a way in form of grants and other benefits for the people.

    Interest rates for CPF if increased, would cause Temasek to earn lesser, then how do we pay the Singaporeans working in there? These are like overheads and risk for Temasek. It is not risk free for Temasek either, so should Singaporeans CPF bear the risk of lost as well? if so, why dont invest in investible assets using CPF?

    I know there would be people that disagree with what i said. But looking far sighted is something that the govt is probably looking at. Its frustrating but yet serves its purpose.

    Peace Out.

  12. Dylan Shue Zhen Yao

    To be fair, I don’t see why there is a need to make a fuss out of why GIC and Temasek holdings earns 6.5% to 16% but only gives 2.5% to 4% on our CPF. The amount we get is so much better than what you can get in a bank savings account for such a low amount of risk! And Singaporeans do benefit from the investments made. The money goes into the reserves and the net investment returns contribution (NIRC) from the various investments is used by the Government in a number of areas such as healthcare and education. Every year, this NIRC supplements the Budget by $7 to $8 billion!

    Also, I think it’s dangerous to allow the people to opt out of the minimum sum scheme. There will be people who do not save enough for their old age and then the responsibility will fall to the government, and eventually the taxpayers. Will it be fair to those who save diligently for their retirement?

    • Jason

      Thanks for putting it so well, I also agree that a forced savings scheme is actually quite beneficial. Most people are not very motivated to make any savings, so the CPF scheme is not too bad in that aspect. But CPF can still be a little more flexible in helping those who are in temporary need of help. Like for example medical crises or in between jobs, these people should be allowed to withdraw a small sum to help them get along.

      • Mike Chua

        Actually CPF allows withdrawal on case by case basic but you need to submit proof that you are having some serious illness and u need that amount.

    • Rick

      Haa.. Thas only because the G controls the banks too.
      In Msia, their CPF equivalent get average 6% past 10 yrs. In Australia, their bank interest is already higher than our CPF returns. Healthcare ? Education? What are u talking about?! Spore spends the least on healthcare and one of lowest in Education, have u been sleeping?!?

      • Jason

        Where did you get those data? Presumably from Roy’s ‘truths’ am I right? please la, I did my own research, turns out the government does pay a lot in our education as compared to other countries. I have not been sleeping, unlike you. You are just a sheep, follow what Roy says, have you ever thought about doing your own damned research and calculations?

      • Jason

        Annual non-subsidised fees here for university is about 28680. From NTU website. SG citizen only pays 7850. X4 years how much already? Times the thousands of undergrads? One year, NTU, NUS,SMU,SIT,SUTD take in about 20k students, after deducting 16% foreigner and 4% PR.

        Many people don’t see the subsidies, but its because the amount you pay has already been subsidised.

      • DoyourMath

        @rick

        Have you consider the fact that the company pay 16% extra salary into CPF account every single MONTH? So ya it’s not 2.5% or 4% per year.

  13. SAD ROY

    Roy

    Go Away please. I hope you LOSE YOUR CASE Against the PM. You should be sued and SHUT UP AND WORK FOR YOUR WORTH
    You clearly behave like some uneducated socialist such as our European Counterparts where Governments are BROKE, DESTITUTE
    GO AWAY PLEASE
    GET SUED TILL YOUR PANTS DROP

    • I left Singaporean airspace, and loosened my tie.

      And how much do you have in your bank account? Enough to howl with the wolves?

      As a regular visitor, I tell you this with confidence: Singaporeans are turkeys voting for Christmas.
      When my company wanted to transfer me to Singapore, I said no – precisely because I don’t want to live in a place like this, and because you already have more than enough foreigners. Give me your neighbours or “broke socialist” Europe anytime.

      I really hope you lot can somehow rationally think about what would be in your own best interest: a (preferrably social, because your Pioneer Generation deserves that) democracy or continued subservience to the Sentosa Cove crowd. A very limited crowd you almost certainly do not belong to, but are currently at the grace of.

      Just my SGD 0.02.

  14. adrian

    c’mon, let’s be frank here. The CPF board has done a great job so far, providing interests of 2.5% – 4% p.a. It is not fair to be saying that they took all our money to re-invest to earn higher returns. Why not try investing yourself and see if it works out? In fact, many other countries are attempting to emulate CPF.

    • Sgcynic

      What a joke. Let’s be frank. Please provide examples of the returns of other countries funds to compare with the CPF returns. Emulate CPF? What are they trying to emulate? The forced nature, the minimum sum to lock funds in, the repeated pushing back of the withdrawal age? What exactly are they attempting to emulate?

      • Jason

        Can you provide examples of a better bank return rate? one that can guarantee your return and also give you a 2.5-4% return? The pushing back of the withdrawal age goes hand in hand with the increasing age of which people die. If the average person dies at 100, do you think think it is wise to release funds at 55? Do you think 155k can last you 45 years? Didnt think so. I’ve heard lots of arguments against CPF, but can you tell me, what is a fairer way to get people to save for retirement?

      • Sgcynic@gmail.com

        Please, please Jason. Weren’t you talking about other countries? So compare apples with apples shall we? So that means comparing pension funds and sovereign funds to the CPF? And you seem unable to say exactly what other countries are emulating the CPF. Empty claims?

      • Jason

        I never made those claims, learn to read?

        Yeah, lets compare. CPF is not a pension scheme its a forced savings scheme. Meaning that no matter how little or how much I put in, I will still receive the same or even a little more when it comes the time for me to withdraw. Agree? If I put in 200k, I will get back 200k or 200k with interests. If you put in nothing, you get nothing. Simple? Now lets compare to pension funds in other countries and what they are doing. In those countries, it is a different model, everyone gets the same amount of pension. The pension fund is grown through taxes. Even if I was taxed more, or taxed less, it doesn’t matter, I will still get back the same amount. So how is that fair? If I was taxed at 1k/month while another person was taxed at 200/month, but at the end, we still get back the same amount monthly, do you think that is fair? I don’t. I like the CPF scheme, yes it has its flaws, too inflexible is one such flaw, but to me, it is the fairest way for the people. Because you get back the amount that you put in. Thoughts?

      • Mike Chua

        Without CPF, everyone depend on companies pension program and when one get retrenched before their pension period, they lost their pension. The fact that our govt allows to use CPF to buy property, stocks and medical bill. Which countries allow that? If it is not your money, can you do that?

    • Rick

      U r a classic example of a Sleeping Singaporean. Go check how much other nations are paying for thei bank interests and CPF equivalent first.
      The Sg government controls the banks, the CPF, the media, thats how they keep people in the dark.
      And maybe u also want to explain how the CPF min sum is increasing at such a rate higher than inflation, and 10+% in 2009 which coincidence with Temasek/GIC loss of billions?!?

      • Jason

        Yeah, I checked, turns out. You can’t just compare interest vs interest. You have to compare the margin between loans and interest, and compare that to SG and other countries, try it, its about the same. Yup SG, controls the media. Thats why TRS(social media) can have 225k likes but still not shut down right? Because TRS is actually pro-PAP.

      • Kyle

        Australia 10 year bond yield: 3.7%
        Singapore 10 year bond yield: 2.3%
        AIG 10 year annuity: 2.9%

        The market obviously disagrees with you. People pay a premium to invest in Singapore bonds. Even if you extrapolate it according to the yield curve to an annuity, it comes to an annual yield of about 3.5%. Comparing to Australia, you’d expect a minimum of 5% annual yield if you want to take out an annuity backed by their government. Taken straight from their website, CPF is invested in Singapore government bonds. Apples and oranges; high-yield annuities or asset managers elsewhere invest in risky assets and are not in anyway guaranteed to the extent CPF is.

        In summary, Finance 101: Returns are as a compensation for risk, not some number plucked out of thin air. If you want an 8% return on your CPF, you must be prepared to take on the risk that an 8% return entails – as a comparable, are you willing to have almost 40% of your yearly salary in Greece bonds (6% 10 year yield)? If so, then by all means. Don’t complain when you realise the money in your CPF account has fallen by 70% because you were forced to take a “haircut”.

        I agree that it could be marginally higher though, maybe between 3% to 5% in accordance to the market plus a liquidity premium due to the inability to withdraw early.

      • Alan

        Jason
        Stop defending as if you are a PAP running dog. Comparing apple with apple, why is our CPF returns much much lower than that of Malaysia’s EPF scheme who pays our on average 6~7% over the last few decades ? Note Singapore often boast they are a more competent Govt while Malaysia’s EPF scheme has no minimum sum to lock people’s savings and they don’t have to worry that Malaysians will gamble their retirement savings away at Genting.

      • Jason

        @Alan

        Probably because it is against their majority to gamble in the first place. Muslims are not allowed to gamble. Even so, if you compare their country and ours, I see more old beggars on their streets than on our own, not to say we don’t have any, we do, but not as much as them. Yes, our CPF can give more than just 2.5-4%. I quite agree on that too. but its not like the extra money just disappears right? That extra money is diverted back into our reserves and budget surpluses. GIC pumps in about 7 billion into the budget. One must look at social factors as well. Are Singaporeans more likely to gamble than Malaysian?

        Like I said before I don’t mind if people decide to withdraw all their CPF. I think CPF should be flexible enough to implement an opt-out scheme. BUT, on the condition that the person who opt-out DOES NOT demand for ANY handouts and benefits once his savings run out. Fair? These people who withdraw everything out, some of them will definitely lose their money. Either they lavishly spend it away or lose it by gambling, a proportion of them definitely will lose it. If they are okay with not asking for handouts, I don’t mind letting them withdraw all their CPF monies. Just don’t ask the taxpayers to save them when they go bankrupt.

      • Sgcynic

        We also know how the GIC and Temasek gambled during the 2008 financial crisis. They bet big and lost on Citibank and others. Stupid Malaysians, only know how to follow the rest of the world and never bet with gung-Ho like Singapore. Continue to pay out 6-7% pa.

  15. ksekaran7

    you are a fake Singaporean. why don’t you expose the Wayang party. you are staging a great Wayang.I salute mr lee hsieng long. you deserve more than being sued. if I am the i pull your pants down. expose your true intention.

  16. Roy Backside Itchy

    Roy,

    You are an insult to people’s intelligence. You are a noisy, annoying person whose greatest curse was having access to the computer whilst your brain and maturity remain underdeveloped.

    Do you know that feeling where a person cringes to the core and shakes their head in disbelief when they are exposed to some smartass-know-it-all young punk ranting on and on? And you know they are deluded but you keep your mouth shut because it is a waste of energy engaging with egotistical, attention-seeking dumbfucks?

    That’s the feeling I get when you open your mouth.

    I have no sympathy for you – you totally deserve it. Take this as a tax on your stupidity. You are all bark and no bite.

    Yawn

  17. Freedom

    You PAP IBs. Don’t you remember our beloved late president Mr Ong Teng Cheong asked the government for transparency to show him how much we have in our reserve. Can only PAP IBs tells me what is the reply given to him. Question two : Do our government even knows how much we have in our reserves? We are talking and asking about transparency about our money. We just need to ask for greater transparency. Thought the ruling party wants to connect to the citizens. We want transparency.

    • Ugin Phua

      @Freedom…don’t come and talk about PAP IB. Who are you fooling. I don’t vote for PAP. I am the real ordinary citizen. But I have had enough of the opposition’s lies and bullshit. I was fooled by you guys in 2011. There is nothing real with you guys. All you guys support are just low life LIARS like ROY. Thank you roy for helping me to make an early decision for the 2016 election to cast out the opposition. And I will suggest to all my friend to spit and say “You bloody low life liar.” the next time we see Spider.

      • Freedom

        Don’t do name calling Phua. Your remarks make out what a person you are. We are have not to defend roy.We do not support baseless allegations. With regards to your remarks. Do you think the opposition are superhumans. They are members of parliament. Primary task is to take care of their voters and that is without much government support. You don’t forget our dear Lee Kuan Yew said, Aljundied have five years to repent. Whatever you might feel is cheating you or fooling you, is not the opposition. If you think that the opposition cannot change things, then what were the problems in the first place? Why change is needed? For your information, there is not enough opposition in parliament to veto any changes. I am just like you a ordinary citizen. I do not oppose everything and i do not support everything.

      • Sgcynic

        Sure, let’s all vote out of spite in the coming general elections. Spite the PAP, Spite the other parties. Spoilt votes. Lee Hsien Loong returned to power with 40% of the votes.

      • Ugin Phua

        @Freedom.- who asked for change? It is people like LIAR ROY that is asking for change, I was fooled once in 2011 and never again. I am completely disappointed by the opposition movement. Yes, they have once stir up my emotional. I felt unjust at that point. But right after the election. It is all bullshit. LIAR ROY is just a confirmation statement that most of the opposition politician are LIAR using every chance to create chaos in the hope that they can gain power.

        BTW you start first by calling people who commented against LIAR ROY as PAP IB. So who is name calling.

        And LIAR ROY you are a disgrace to the opposition movement who once was filled with zest and passion. Because of you everyone is thinking that the opposition are filled with LIARS.
        LIAR ROY you do not represent ordinary people of Singapore. You are nothing but a low life LIAR
        Last but not least, LIAR ROY. you are a disgrace to your family.

      • Allen

        I am a full supporter of PAP but I don’t agree with their devious dirty politics. Playing like the honourable guy but yet will hit below the belt when it comes to their opponents.

  18. Ugin Phua

    So Roy you have admitted that you are a big fat LIAR!!!. All your allegation about our PM is fales and completely without foundation.
    Why do you want to do that? What is your intention? What other things did you lie to the public?
    Your evil intention is to spread lies to create chaos in the hope to gain power. You are a public enemy number one to our country. You should be trail and punish as a traitor. And please don’t say you represent ordinary Singaporean. We Singaporean are not a boneless low life maggot like you. You are nothing but the lowest scumbag of the society. LIAR LIAR LIAR!!!

  19. Hoorah!

    Yeah, keep calling people who think Roy is a dumbfuck PAP IBs.

    It is no different from those city harvest suckers who keep giving money to Kong Hee.

    Just because you want to believe something is true, does not make it so.

    In the end, facts will come back to bite you. In this case – people who think Roy is an idiot, genuinely think he is an idiot. They may very well be opposition supporters who are starting to see how dumb opposition supporters are that they swing back to PAP, just to go against the opp idiots online

    bet you find that hard to believe.

    it is so real though

    • Jason

      It is real. I am an opposition supporter. But I am also against Roy and his misinformation. If we are to build a country based on transparency and openness, then Roy is not helping to that cause. His data is full of misrepresentations and his argument has many loopholes, his articles always seem to mislead others. he is no better than PAP themselves. Pot calling the kettle black.

  20. Johan Ng Zhuo Han

    You’re an ordinary citizen of Singapore and you speak up on WHAT and based on WHAT? What a mess you’ve got yourself into. Gawd.

  21. Pingback: Freedom of speech? | Blog-Post
  22. KW

    I think we are all missing the point. The point is, what is the PM/PMO doing on SammyBoy??!! Further, they got SC(s) to surf SB forum, during office hrs, and Roy has to pay!

  23. Ben

    Roy. Stop stirring shit. Use your youth more productively. Master a new language. Hone a new specialist skill. make Singapore proud on the world stage. Stop nitpicking about pie splitting, while you squander away your pie growing potential. Call yourself a patriot ? Please reflect.

    • Sgcynic

      Yah Roy, stop stirring the shit. See what you have done? All of them surfaced with your stirring.

  24. Terence Koh

    Roy, I know this must sting but I think the rational thing to do is to apologise and live to fight another day. None of us have as deep a pocket as the pappies so you would help us more by not being financially insolvent from a losing verdict that all of us know is already in the bag for you if you fight them in court. There is no shame in strategically picking your fights. Peace bro. Hope you get through this ok.

  25. Ding Hua

    My view is that Roy is a loser if he can not give evidence for what he says/writes. It will not be responsible behaviour to stir up shit. Waste of time n resources.

    Dare to do, dare to take responsibility. 敢做敢当。

    If a person has a reputation to protect, why are some people here against the idea and his personal freedom to exercise his rights?

    Do you mean that a Prime Minister had no rights to sue when ordinary folks can? That will be double standards.

  26. Ding Hua

    I want to state my admiration for Jason who has come up to say that he had voted for opposition and yet stand up against Roy’s nonsense.

    Likewise, I do am not a PAP or WP supporter, just feel that it should always be Singapore first n political choice second. Someone come defame my country’s PM, regardless of my vote, I will stand with my country’s leader.

    My personal take is that if a person can not follow, he will not be able to lead. You can’t respect others, you don’t deserve respect.

  27. Thinker

    Reading the comments, there are few common issues that are repeated.
    1. CPF Interest rate
    Is 2.5% and 4% too low. To answer the question, we need to be able to compare this interest rate with something similar. Comparing with the 12 months fixed deposit of Singapore Banks makes no sense. The CPF does not give you the flexibility of withdrawing the money at the end of 12 months. What is more reasonable would be to look at the returns from a whole life insurance savings plan. Projection ate even in today’s low interest rate is up to 4.25%. In addition, there is maturity or terminal bonuses. Should we use this interest rate instead and pay CPF members a maturity bonus (peg to the performances of TH &, GIG) at retirement. This might make more sense that pegging CPF interest rate with the Banks or on the returns of TH & GIC on a yearly basis.

    2. Not paying a lump sum at 55
    Some people are afraid that people might gamble it away and come back for more handouts.
    Let me ask you this. If a person does not have a job or enough cash savings at 55, will he need handouts until he reaches 65 when his CPFLife payout starts? What’s the difference?
    In a meritocratic society, we are required to use our ability to succeed. If a lump sum payment is made at 55, and if the person’s skill is in gambling, what makes you think he will lose it away? Just because your skill is different, you see fit to impose on others what you think is right?
    Another person may put his money at 55 into dividends paying stocks and get a quarterly or yearly payout almost immediately rather than having to wait for another 10 years to see his money. You should not impose your preference on others who have different needs and preference. This is what diversity is all about and life is about making choices.

    Our universities ranking have vastly improve due to diversity. Why is diversity valued in on instance but not another?
    So do you think that such a reason for not releasing your CPF at 55 is valid or is the true reason not revealed just like a magician’s secret code which is known to just a few?

    • Ugin Phua

      @Thinker…There is little a person can do when he is old and poor. He only can fall back to his sons or daughter, which will be a burden to the younger generation. Minimum sum is to ensure that people don’t fall into the trap of being old and poor. It is a guarantee income source for the old people.

      Have you not seen that? when an old people has a lump sum cash…very often it was melted away within a short few years. The euphoria of sudden increase in cash has very often overwhelm the need to plan for retirements.

      Minimum sum is a very important social pillar that is holding our aging population up.

      • Thinker

        @Ugin Phua
        Based on what you said, shouldn’t your children hold all your money when you reach 55 and give you a monthly allowance only. Arterial if all your money is in your own bank account. You may be foolish enough to squander them.
        Do you see how lame your argument is?

      • Ugin Phua

        @Thinker
        Lame? walk around and see how many old people lament how their savings was being wasted away? And you might thinlk it is themselves. But very often than not it is their children who squander it away.
        Do you see how disconnected you are?

    • Ben

      Like you said, different people have different preferences, but the government is definitely unable to satisfy each and every preference of each and every individual in society. People have different consumption patterns, values, and environmental setup. As a government body, you need to take that into account and come up with a policy that should provide on the whole returns with the least/the acceptable risk. The Spore government thinks that a return of 2.5%-4% with no risk is the best policy but it may not be so to others who are investment savvy. However, there is no way they can come up with a policy that can take into account people’s preferences for lump sum or not, age for handouts, risk preference, investment savvyness etc. Tradeoffs have to be made regardless. If a policy has so many conditions, we will need more manpower to manage this diverse population and in the end, trying to circumvent one problem may well lead to another. We may need increase taxpayers contribution to pay for more manpower to manage a more complex policy.

      • Thinker

        @Ben
        If it is so good for the government to control your CPF. Why don’t you also let them control your bank account. Afterall if you cannot manage your CPF, you also will not be able to manage your money in the bank.

      • Ben

        I have to admit I am not investment savvy so i only leave my money in the bank without investing it in unit trusts, pennystocks or what not. But at least I know the basics of having to save for a rainy day. Also, you don’t think the bank you put your money in also make use of the deposits to invest on their own while paying u a meager interest rate? At any point in time, the bank does not have all their deposits sitting around doing nothing. They only hold up to a certain % of all deposits. It is called the multiplier effect in economics. Money flows in a circular motion. You also cannot make the sweeping statement that EVERYONE CAN manage their own finances. Can u be sure that if you have 100% control of your money you can make at least 5% every year for the next 30 years without fail?

    • Jason

      Like I said before I don’t mind if people decide to withdraw all their CPF. I think CPF should be flexible enough to implement an opt-out scheme. BUT, on the condition that the person who opt-out DOES NOT demand for ANY handouts and benefits once his savings run out. Fair? These people who withdraw everything out, some of them will definitely lose their money. Either they lavishly spend it away or lose it by gambling, a proportion of them definitely will lose it. If they are okay with not asking for handouts, I don’t mind letting them withdraw all their CPF monies. Just don’t ask the taxpayers to save them when they go bankrupt.

      • Thinker

        @Jason
        There is no government scheme in Singapore that gives you enough money to live on when you have no money. So what handouts are you imaging that these people are asking for if they squander their CPF?
        Doesn’t the govt want the children to take on that responsibility?

        The funny thing is that the govt is not worried that people gamble all their cash in the bank away but is worried that people gamble their CPF away. The solution to this problem is actually to not build casinos and close Singapore Pools.

      • Ben

        now you dont even make sense. First you say people should have the option to take their own money out of CPF at 55 so that they can make better returns on their own (above the 4% the CPF is giving). Then you say the govt is not worried about people squandering their cash in the bank. I give you freedom to invest your own money in your bank you complain. I restrict your ability to control your cash you also complain. Damn if I do damn if I dont. What do you want? You think people are not able to find ways to gamble even if we close the casinos and spore pool? I highly doubt so. The govt is giving you freedom to spend part of your income however you want but also forcing you save a set amount just in case, what is wrong with that?

      • Thinker

        @Ugin Phua
        It’s a strawman argument. We curently have a minimum sum for CPF implemented for the last 10 years and there are still so many poor old people around as you observe. The MSS will not be able to solve the poverty problem. The solution lies elsewhere.
        In fact for the poor, money in had today is better than money in the future. It takes less than10 weeks for a person to die from starvation but you lock his CPF in the MSS for 10 years to start paying an annuity. It’s like asking a person lost in a desert to conserve his water for 10 days and only start drinking it slowly from the 11th day.

      • Thinker

        @Ben
        My point is that controlling the CPF is a bad idea as far as I am concern. However, there are some people who are arguing that it is a good thing. For these people, based on their argument, they might as well let the govt control their bank account. Why doesn’t it make sense?
        Of course if there are no casino and Singapore Pools here, people can still go abroad if they really want to gamble but this is not within the control of the govt. Don’t the govt ban the selling of chewing gum in Singapore even though people can easily bring it in from overseas? If you do not stop the root of the problem (gambling) in the country which are within your control and then worry about things that are out of your control, then that’s hypocrisy. So, if the govt is really concern about people gambling away their CPF and take the moral high ground to implement MSS, then close the 2 casinos and Singapore Pools as well.

      • Ben

        For me I think that controlling the cpf to a certain extent can provide a positive externality at the expense of some personal benefits which is in conflict with your stance. It is hard to say who is right or wrong because both have their merits.
        I honestly will let the govt handle my bank account if they can guarantee that I get risk free returns of 2.5 to 4% because I know nuts about investment and that rate is higher than the bank rate. Unfortunately they do not and cpf is meant as a retirement fund not a bank. Also the function of a bank and it’s usage of deposits is important for the economy because they invest these deposits on things that generate wealth for the economy. The govt on the other hand subsumes the role of trying to balance a budget and also using tax money for government expenditure mostly for public goods. So realistically they cannot and should not take over the role of a bank.
        And also exactly because the govt cannot control people if they want to gamble their income away, cpf forces you to save even if your intentions are to use it for gambling. I personally abhor the opening up of 2 casinos in Singapore but I also understand that profits from these casinos are also taxed and goes back into fund in public goods. At the end of the day whether the govt should take a utilitarian stand or a deontology one where moral issues are at stake is something that should not be taken lightly. But there is also no right way to do things.

      • Thinker

        @Ben
        The good news, at least for you is that the govt allows you to top up your CPF with cash. So you can transfer your bank deposit to CPF to ‘enjoy’ the CPF interest rates. As for me, there are many other options available with higher returns and I would prefer to have my CPF return to me.

        My view is that our govt gets many things in the reverse. They want to control private morality when what they should do is to control public morality.

        I do not subscribe to the utilitarian concept but that’s a separate discussion altogether.

      • Ben

        On the contrary I think your stand on utilitarianism vs deontology is inherently critical to any societal and economic policies because dissenters usually make the point that the govt should not which is in essence deontological in nature while people who are in support of say the cpf system can be considered utilitarian because they think that even though there are people who suffers because of this system the overall good outweighs the bad. Therefore if you have a solution that can over this moral dichotomy you will solve a lot of problems not jus in Singapore but the whole world

    • Thinker

      We are going on into philosophy and that’s a long discussion.
      I do not agree with the utilitarianism concept simply because you cannot quantify or justify killing just 1 person to save 100 persons is right. What if the person to be killed is you? Will you agree?
      What I believe the govt must do is to provide more choices for a compulsory scheme like CPF so that I have the option to decide what I want with my money at 55. If I choose to gamble it away or to give it to charity, that’s a private moral issue and the govt should not meddle in this area. On the other hand, by all means go control public morality which might result is socializing cost to tax payers but privatizing profits to some individuals (http://robertreich.org/post/19266068257)

      See this short clip.

      • Ben

        Long but an important one that many people tend to forget and just spew off business and economic theories whenever possible.
        At the very least the moral foundations of any society is largely dependent on the moral values our leaders and policy makers hold because their values influence the policies they make which has a long term impact on its citizens
        While I may not be willing to die because of 100 strangers, some people will and the govt may also choose do so if it is aligned with their moral cognitions.
        I ask you this: if the govt suddenly thinks tt income inequality is too high and decides to redistribute by taxing the top half and giving it back to the bottom half, who and how many will object?
        Also while I agree that the cpf can be more flexible at the end of the day we still have to ask the question whether doing so creates more benefit than cost. You could give a man his lump sum and leave him to his own devices but when he loses it all for whatever reasons and becomes homeless your deontological values should dictate that the government have to take care of him no? Because he is part of the society. However, The economic and social costs for implementing and managing new policies and having to deal with sudden increase in homelessness and poverty may not be justified. Even though it may at first look like a private moral issue, it may eventually become a public moral issue.

    • Mike Chua

      Yes. I seen good example that once one get their large payout, they spent it within days. There is one person I know had an injury while at work. Once he has the insurance payout, he went Macau for holiday. When he was back and cannot work anymore due to injury, he went to govt to ask for hangout.

      • Thinker

        @Ben
        Again, moral value of leaders and private individuals will defer. So it is best that they use their moral value to control public morality. Hence so long as a policy does not infringe on private morality, then there is no issue.
        You are not willing to die for 100 strangers but if someone else wants to do so, it his choice. Notice the word CHOICE.
        Singaporeans are asked to self sacrifice for many things including in this case the MSS but what does the govt say when they demand their million dollar salary. Suddenly, sacrifice seems to fly out the window. Where is the moral high ground?
        Your example of higher taxes for the rich to redistribute to the poor leans closer to public morality than private morality but even in such cases, the rich have a choice to either make more money and be tax more or to earn less. There is no such choice for the MSS. In this respect, we are even worse than North Korea because even there even when one candidate (Supreme Leader) is presented for election, you still have a choice not to vote for him.

        What cost/benefit analysis do you need to do. A simple opt in or opt out of MSS will cost lots of money to administer?

        Why would spending his CPF make him homeless? The reverse is probably true. If you don’t give him his CPF, he might not have money to continue to pay for his house and his flat gets repossessed. You hold his CPF, he becomes homeless, tell me what govt scheme he can apply for to get free housing and a monthly allowance? You see, the MSS is definitely not the solution if a person is broke, homeless or unemployed. If he is broke, he needs a source of income. If he is homeless, he needs a roof over his head. If he is unemployed, we need to get him a job. How can the MSS which kicks in 10 years later and even then, pay an annuity help such a person. Can you see the strawman argument presented by the govt for the MSS.

      • Thinker

        @Mike Chua
        Your example is like telling me that someone bought a HDB flat that have a leaked ceiling. So your conclusion is that all HDB flats have leaky ceiling and so nobody should buy them? So the mistake of one person causes the whole nation to be bound by the MSS? How logical!

        BTW, can you tell me what types of handouts did he get from the government after he came back from Macau broke.

  28. AngSarLee

    LHL is Chinese-ed from Catholic High right? Didn’t he learn the phrase “清者自清浊者自浊”, there is no need to sue!!! To sue sounds to me like “此地无银三百两”. Not a wise thing to do.

    • Ugin Phua

      AngSarLee…If I go about telling your friends, neighbour, relative saying your house that you own came from YOU cheating other peoples money. Please go and hide under your bed and “清者自清浊者自浊” and enjoy your “愚蠢无知,封建思想”

      • Sam Wong

        Incoherent reply by Ugin Phua.
        Please read Johnson’s comment at the top of this page.

      • AngSarLee

        Great one, sam wong!!! Ugin, Roy go around and say bad things about people, will you believe him. To say things like “愚蠢无知,封建思想” you are getting personal attack which is like like what our great leaders like to do. Who is “愚蠢无知,封建思想”?

  29. DP

    Pathetic, really disgusting. Great leaders do not do this. They take criticism in their stride and fight it with facts. When they do that they will earn the respect of even their enemies. Look at Gandhi, look at Mandela but then I guess when you follow your father’s footprint and one cannot expect you to be any better. Look at what’s happening in North Korea, you cannot expect a despot’s son to be a man with moral and honor. Guess that’s what happening in Disney Land with the death penalty. Writing book after book about one achievements will not make people love and respect you. you will know how much people respected you the day you die and how many people sincerely shed a tear for you (not the organized millions attending a state show). I guess I will be cheering when my hated despot dies.

    • Ugin Phua

      @DP …If I go about telling your friends, neighbour, relative saying your house that you own came from YOU cheating other peoples money. Do you call this criticism?. Please get the facts right

      If ROY is not lying then stood firm. But in this case ROY admitted he is a LIAR slandering someone. So Please get the fact right! Pathetic are educated people like yourself supporting people like LIAR ROY who have no integrity at all. He will go all out even at the peril of our nation well being for his own political gain.

  30. Pingback: The Heart Truths Blogger Roy Ngerng issued letter of demand by lawyers from PM Lee Hsien Loong to remove Blog Post | mitsueki ♥ | Singapore Lifestyle Blogger - Food, Fashion, News & Utter Randomness
  31. Brendon Liew

    Roy Ngering,

    Dude, I respect you and your ideals. But, please back down, for your own sake. Stop fighting this battle which you will never win. I don’t know if you have a wife, children or family who love you. Ultimately, they will suffer if you persist in this cause. Look at those before you (Jeya,Tang,Francis,etc), where are they now?
    Yes, Singapore isn’t the perfect country, we have our own dirty linen. But tell me, which country in the world doesn’t? Politics was never a clean and fair game to begin with, you and I both know that.
    Change in Singapore is happening, but you’ve got to give it time. Our government, despite their shortcomings, have done a good job overall. Look at where Singapore is today, do you think we’d have achieved so much and come so far without lots of sacrifices along the way? Like you, I also hope for many things in Singapore to be better, to be different. But against the grand scheme of things, if you look at the larger picture, you’d realize that Singaporeans have more to be thankful for than to be bitter about.
    I’m not trying to scare you, but what you are embarking upon now can be construed as Sedition.If you don’t mind being bankrupted, and living the rest of your life in exile in some faraway country, unable to see your loved ones, or even attend their funerals, then by all means, carry on the fight for your ideals.
    In any case, just know that ours is a universe based on vibration. You, and you alone, create your own reality. Not anyone else.
    If you want a better world, just create it in your mind, and hold its image there, unwavering. Only then can it come into being.
    ” As within, so without. ”
    I hope things turn out well for you……I really do.

    • Mabeth tan

      Roy ——Read Brandon’s advice to you carefully. In my view, this is the best piece of advice and is so well written and logically presented to you. You should read it carefully and reflect upon it. Wake up to reality and don’t be a A-hole and a no-brainer. You have no chance and you are like an ant taking on a Tiger. Besides, the PAP will still around after the next election. With people with opposing views like you fumbling around, there is no way you will find the right kind of capable people to take over the government. Please stop your day dreaming and wake up.

  32. Pingback: Blogger given until Wednesday to apologise for allegedly defaming Singapore's Prime Minister - Mumbrella Asia
  33. R. Chow

    Roy,

    As someone who reads your blog (even prior to this saga), I’d like to know if you had received prior warning from LHL or anyone acting on his behalf to take down the post before this letter was issued to you. This is an important factor that must be addressed because it affects the perceptions of the audience. I hope you hear from you either through a reply here or a personal message. Please be transparent. Thank you.

    Regards,
    R. Chow

  34. Raymond

    I am not impressed when the PM of a country threatens to sue a citizen for defamation. I am more impressed if the PM writes his own blog to point out the half truths or outright lies that may be circulating in the social media. Afterall, if a concerned citizen took time and effort to analyse the figures and write his case, i think its only fair that the PM spend some time and effort to explain why he thinks the case is a total baloney. In the process of educating the blogger, he also educates the public at large. By doing so, I think he will win more hearts and minds. I also agree with the earlier comments that while presenting our case in cyberspace, it is best we focus on the issues and accord due respect to people as well as institutions. There is no need to call people names or put labels on them etc. People will then view the questions and issues raised as something that is for the betterment of the country and there is no personal or hidden agenda.

    • Deaf Frog's toothpick

      i agree generally with you views, a leader in a position of power and authority should preferably use legal means only as a last resort when all efforts to resolve the differences had been exhausted.

      also, when the last resort is used, the law firm engaged by the leader should preferably be of medium size and not perceived to charge expensive fees.

      • Deaf Frog's toothpick

        if posting an article on a blog or any other medium is too low class an activity for someone who should be running a country, better not let me catch this person doing anything on facebook.

        why does it have to be a blog? PMO has a website, a leader does not even need to write the article himself. options are plenty, what you have presented is a false dilemma, you need a cold shower and strong coffee.

      • Mabeth tan

        what make you think that we want you to speak up for us. ? Frankly i am very happy with the way the CPF is managed as it helps to keep something safe for me for the rainy day. If you are so unhappy with this country and the leaders that run it, why don’t you try NIGERIA? Let me tell you Roy, come the next election , this country will still be run by the PAP. The reason is simple—- With fumblers like you and your associates acting like clowns running around, who do you expect to take over the government. ??? You are a joker n you ask for it. If you are not careful, you may find yourself end up at Changi Hilton one day.. And that will be the day as Buddy Hollie said.

      • echo

        Point is that the way that the CPF is handled remains unclear, which is why people like Roy would speculate (to put it mildly) or accuse the man in charge of the operation of being shady. Asking the Prime Minister to write a blog is a daft idea, although the motivation behind the idea is to hold him accountable for the way he handles our funds. To that end I would support the idea of making the system more transparent, to bridge the gap between the amount of money supposedly earned and the amount we receive subsequently.

        Or to put it in your words:
        “hello?

        i voted LHL in to run the country. i just want to know how he do it.”

      • Goh Kim Lian

        for Echo ^:

        I voted WP to speak up in parliament and to speak up on all kinds of contentious issues.

        I don’t even get a squeak.

        I am not interested in how the govt is investing my CPF. Frankly I think they are doing a good job in that area.

        I am disappointed with the opposition.

        Are you guys so desperate that you will defend retards like Roy and Gilbert Goh?

        Do opposition supporters not have any standards at all?

  35. Pingback: Bossy Aunties & Daring Bloggers | Dewdrop Notes 露语
  36. Pingback: Yet another blogger being threaten to be sued by the PAP leaders …. | Askmelah.com
  37. Ugin Phua

    Being a PM he has no choice. If you ask any lawyer he will give the same advice.

    Our PM is already very gracious. Look at the amount of attack in the cyberspace. Many of them can easily be put up as a legal case. But for this case, it is not only concern PM himself, it is also the trust of Singaporean’s putting their retirement fund in CPF. So, he have no choice but to go through legal means. He is not even using his power as PM to do it. He is using the standard legal route. Just the same as ordinary citizen.

    As for ROY, if all his accusations are true. I believe people will support him morally and financially. I am sure many oversea NGO will pour in money if he is telling the truth.

    But obviously truth and gut is not with him.

    • Thinker

      PM has plenty of choices.
      1. He can do nothing.
      2. He can clarify what Roy said is wrong/inaccurate.
      3. He can ask Roy to apologize.
      4. He can ask Roy to apologize and pay cost.
      5. He can give Roy a warning.

      What he chose to do tells s the type of person he is.
      Do you think that President Obama would choose the same option?

  38. Deaf Frog's toothpick

    regardless whether an emperor is wearing clothes or not, a child who claims that the emperor is not wearing any clothes will always be wrong.

    who should provide the evidence to prove their case? the emperor or the child?

  39. Tan Hock

    Your ” I am Roy Ngerng. I am an ordinary citizen in Singapore who believes in speaking up for my country and my fellow citizens.”
    I m an ordinary citizen. I dont believe that you are speaking for my country and fellow citizens. I m warning you to stop claiming that you are speaking for me, a fellow citizen and perhaps for like-minded folks.
    If you are at odds with the incumbent govt and wish to fight them beyond the election period, by all means do it on your own accord and with your supporters. However, its insulting to continuously claim that you are speaking for country and fellow citizens. And doing it with outrageous misinformation and distortion is not doing your cause any good.
    If you persist on continuing your insulting ways despite this warning, adviseable that you be prepared for further actions

      • joseph P

        Me too, Roy speak on my behalf too 🙂
        Tan Hock can go geylang tan kuku and hawk his hockware.
        Hahaha

  40. Anthony Chew Eng Hock

    Roy,

    You don’t need a lawyer.

    You need a doctor.

    A psychiatrist to be precise.

    Regards
    Anthony

    • michelle

      Tiberius, keep it for yourself. You won’t know when you will need it when the lightning strikes…

  41. Jason

    If I may, I think there is a silver lining to Roy being issued a letter by PM. Look at the number of comments, I have faith in Singaporeans that debates like these will continue on and on. This is a good thing and this is what a democracy should be like, both sides giving their views and opinions on what matters most to them. I don’t think anyone here has a foul intention, not even Roy, everyone has something important that they believe in and its good that we are airing our views.

    If I may surmise, the main points of both sides, For-CPF and Against-CPF.

    Against CPF camp wants their money returned to them, for it is their right and it is their money. While For-CPF does not want this to happen in the case where people may spend away their savings and end up on the streets. This will lead to more socialist policies and higher taxes in order to save people from the streets. I for one, would call for something in between, release CPF funds on a case-by-case basis, if a person is in a job crisis or medical crisis, allow him to withdraw CPF for that interim moment. CPF is highly inflexible and more can be done to make it more flexible. Of course, this has to be done at a cost, administrative work on such a national scale will require lots of man hours, it can’t be done by 1 or 2 admin staff.

    Lastly, there are also those who call for greater transparency within CPF/GIC/Temasek, which also has two sides. Economic defence is one of our main areas of defence, if critical information is leaked, other nations may launch economic attacks and we will see our investments making losses. While greater transparency is also good as it gives citizens more confidence in our government with more accountability. It is also our money, hence we should have the right to know where it is and what is being done with it. Both has its valid points.

    It is good that we are debating and that good points are coming from both sides.

    • hannah

      hey jason and a few others whose names i cant remember, thank you for opening up my eyes. i got onto these articles thinking yes our cpf is being leeched and so on; i want to find out more. but damn this thread of comments got me thinking whether all of these facts are true or not. i guess not.
      we cant believe all that we see and read. we need to be more open minded and think of both the pros and cons of any issue.
      and for those who want roy to overthrow LHL; damn, can you imagine if there was a complete sudden overhaul of the current policies or government? Singapore will go chaotic man. we cannot think for only ourselves but also for the whole Singapore

  42. amanda

    Roy, the government just wants to help us save for we don’t. They don’t use our CPF. The money inside belong to ourselves. Please say something that really helps singaporean be more aware of the social problems in singapore…

    • Jason

      True, I think the source of the CPF problem is not CPF itself, but things like social inequality, overpopulation, dissatisfaction with public utilities(MRT,buses), increasing cost of uncontrolled rent that is driving prices up. These things are more important and are at the root of it. Because of these problems, many people want to withdraw their CPF money in order to solve them, but are unable to withdraw, hence, it seems that the fault lies with CPF, but drawing out your money won’t make you richer, it won’t solve these problems either.

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

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

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ 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