Singaporeans Have Only $55,000 in Our CPF, Can Only Take Out $400!

But how much do Singaporeans have exactly inside our CPF? This question has been asked to the government several times but they have still refused to answer.

However, over the past 2 months, the government has been forced to reveal and admit to many truths, which would finally allow us to have as close an estimate as possible.

The clearest answer came from Mr Yee Ping Yi, CEO of the CPF Board, last week. At the Forum on CPF and Retirement Adequacy, organised by the Institute of Policy Studies, Mr Yee revealed that the median cash balance of ‘active’ CPF members aged 55 in 2013 is $126,000.

However, this is only half the truth as this $126,000 includes “savings withdrawn for accumulation of housing assets”. In fact, when you look at Annex I of the CPF Annual Report, you can see that the median balance would be between $100,000 to $150,000. Again, this “include amounts withdrawn under Investment, education, Residential Properties, Non-Residential Properties and Public Housing Schemes”.

But realistically, we should only be looking at how much cash only we have inside our CPF, as we can only retire on the cash portion.

So, how much exactly do Singaporeans have inside our CPF, if we look only at the cash portion?

The government does not want to reveal this information, but over the past 2 months, they have finally admitted to more information, which allows us to triangulate this information better.

 Nearly 75% of Singaporeans Do Not Even Have $77,500 in Our CPF

First, the government had revealed that, “50% of active CPF members met the Minimum Sum in 2013“, but this is “including 15% who used their properties to support up to half of the CPF Minimum Sum”.

Yesterday, I found out that of the 3.51 million CPF members, there are 1.85 million ‘active’ CPF members. This means that there are 53% of ‘all’ CPF members are ‘active’ members. Thus this would mean that only 26.5% of ‘all’ CPF members are able to meet the CPF Minimum Sum, and if you do not include the 15% who are able to meet the CPF Minimum Sum by using both property and cash, this would mean that only 11.5% of  ‘all’ CPF Members would be able to meet the CPF Minimum in cash only. This means that 88.5% of Singaporeans cannot meet the CPF Minimum Sum!

Thus if we work backwards:

  1. Only 11.5% of all CPF members have the CPF Minimum Sum of $155,000 fully in cash last year.
  2. There were another 15% who met the CPF Minimum Sum by using their properties to support up to half of the CPF Minimum Sum, which would mean that they would have at least half of the CPF Minimum Sum inside their CPF. As such, there would be 26.5% (11.5% + 15%) of all CPF members who have at least half of the CPF Minimum Sum inside their CPF.
  3. Half of the CPF Minimum Sum is $77,500, which means that 73.5% , or nearly three-quarters of Singaporeans have less than $77,500 in our CPF.

Three-Quarters of Singaporeans Have Less Than $77,500 in Our CPF

So, now we know that nearly three-quarters of Singaporeans don’t even have $77,500 in our CPF.

Then, what about 50% of Singaporeans? How much do we have?

 50% of Singaporeans Do Not Have $60,000 in Our CPF

Earlier this month, it was revealed in parliament that, “the CPF pays an additional 1% interest on the first $60,000 of combined balances. As a result, about two-thirds of members earn 5% interest on all their balances in their Special, Medisave and Retirement Accounts. Over half of all members earn 3.5% on all their Ordinary Account savings.”

According to the CPF Board, “This works out to be 3.5% per annum earned on the first $20,000 in a member’s OA, and 5% per annum earned on the first $40,000 (up to $60,000 if no OA savings) in a member’s SMA and Retirement Account (RA).”

Thus what this means is:

  • 33% of Singaporeans have less than $40,000 in our SMA.
  • 50% of Singaporeans have less than $20,000 in our OA.
  • Thus this mean could be that 50% of Singaporeans have a total of less than $60,000 in our CPF.

<chart>

So, what we can establish so far is:

  • 73.5% of Singaporeans do not even have $77,500 in our CPF.
  • 50% of Singaporeans have less than $60,000 in our CPF.

So, is the median CPF balance in only cash $60,000?

The Median CPF Balance is Only $55,000. 50% of Singaporeans Have Less Than $55,000 in Our CPF

We have one final piece of information that would enable us to have a more accurate estimate.

The CPF Board CEO has revealed that the median CPF balance is $126,000, but this pertains only to (1) active CPF members and (2) includes amounts withdrawn for housing.

So:

  • There are only 53% of active CPF members and 47% of non-active members.
  • Non-active members have about 30% of the balance of active members, or a possible median balance of about $37,800 only.
  • The government has revealed “Among members who turned 55 years old over the past five years and had used CPF monies to purchase HDB flats, an average of 55% of their OA savings had been withdrawn to finance their flats at age 55.” But this is only for those who purchase HDB flats. For those who use their CPF to buy private properties, they would have to withdraw twice as much, which means that the average withdrawn to finance any property could be as high as 68%, or more.
  • Also, according to the CPF Board, 95.1% of ‘active’ CPF members have used their CPF to buy property.
  • And according to the CPF Board, of the 36% of the CPF Singaporeans contribute into CPF, 23% go into the OA, 6% into the SA and 7% into the MA, which means that about two-thirds go into the OA. Thus for CPF members who have used their CPF to pay for their housing loans, the CPF median balance would be about $71,000, after withdrawing 68% of their OA savings to pay for their housing loans.
  • Thus in totality, the median CPF balance of all CPF members in cash only could be $55,000.

So, do we have the answer? Is the median CPF balance actually $55,000?

Does this mean that 50% of Singaporeans, or half of us, have less than $55,000 in our CPF?

Not only that, apparently in 2011, the average net balance of CPF members was only $61,500. The average is usually higher than the median. This mean that the median net CPF balance would be lower.

Average Net CPF balances, 1997 to 2001

As such, the evidence that we have does indeed point to the fact that the median CPF balance would be only $55,000. Half of Singaporeans do not even have $55,000 in our CPF!

Why Did the Government Increase The CPF Minimum Sum, Knowing that Singaporeans Will Not Be Able to Meet the CPF Minimum Sum!

Now that we know how much the average Singaporeans have inside our CPF, this begs many questions:

  1. Why did the government keep increasing the CPF Minimum Sum, knowing full well that Singaporeans will not at all be able to meet the CPF Minimum Sum? Today, the CPF Minimum Sum is $155,000 and the average Singaporean has only $55,000 in our CPF, or only 35% of this CPF Minimum Sum. So, why did the government increase the CPF Minimum Sum, knowing full well that for 90% of Singaporeans, our CPF will be stuck inside the CPF and we will not be able to withdraw our CPF? Why did the government intentionally create a policy to trap our CPF money inside? For what?
  2. Why is it that even though the government knows that 90% of Singaporeans cannot meet the CPF Minimum Sum and that the average Singaporean only has 35% of the CPF Minimum Sum inside our CPF, the government refused to increase our wages and CPF interest rates in tandem with the CPF Minimum Sum, to allow us to meet this CPF Minimum Sum?
  3. Finally, the government has finally admitted that they control the construction programmes and sets the prices of HDB flats. Then why do they keep increasing the prices of the HDB flats to such an extent that we have to pay more than half of our CPF OA into paying housing loans, and not be able to save enough to retire?

Can you see how this is wrong on many levels?

Singaporeans Only Have 35% of the CPF Minimum Sum in Our CPF

In effect, the government created the CPF Minimum Sum policy and kept increasing it, with full knowledge that the majority of Singaporeans would never be able to meet the CPF Minimum Sum. And in spite of their fanciful assurances that they will help Singaporeans meet the CPF Minimum Sum, in reality, they would know that this would be next to impossible, because their policy is created to not allow Singaporeans to meet the CPF Minimum Sum in the first place!

Then, what is the CPF Minimum Sum even created for in the first place?

Now, take a look at how the average net CPF balances has changed since 1997, and compare it with how the CPF Minimum Sum has increased since then. You can see that the CPF Minimum Sum has increased so much faster than the average net CPF balance!

CPF Minimum Sum Grows Faster Than the CPF Itself

If so, the government has known for the past 20 years that the average Singaporean, and in fact, the majority of Singaporeans simply would never have enough in our CPF to be able to meet the CPF Minimum Sum, even since 20 years ago. And yet for the past 20 years, they have kept increasing it, causing even more Singaporeans to have our CPF stuck inside the CPF and not be able to withdraw our CPF.

Why did the government keep increasing the CPF Minimum Sum, knowing full well that the majority of Singaporeans would not be able to meet the CPF Minimum Sum, and will have our CPF stuck inside?

Why? What is the government trying to do? Why did the government force our CPF to be stuck inside?

No Wonder the Government Did Not Want To Give Us The Answers To The Truth

No wonder last week when I had posed the question to the government at the IPS Forum last week, the government had refused to answer my questions.

I had asked:

  1. What is the proportion of ‘all’ CPF members who can meet the CPF Minimum Sum in only cash?
  2. What is the median CPF balance?
  3. What is the median CPF payout?

The government did not want to answer these questions at all.

Today, we had to calculate and triangulate by ourselves to know the answer:

  1. 90% of Singaporeans cannot meet the CPF Minimum Sum.
  2. The median CPF balance is only $55,000.
  3. Working backwards, this means that the median CPF payout would be only $425. This means that half of Singaporeans will be able to get less than $425 monthly payouts for our retirement!

Singaporeans Have Only $55,000 In Our CPF! 90% Cannot Even Meet The CPF Minimum Sum!

Indeed, things are so bad that, Associate Professor Tan Ern Ser had illustrated at the IPS Forum that even though up to 70% of older Singaporeans have CPF but only 4% to 7% though that their CPF has enough to use. He asked, older Singaporeans (might have) CPF, but (do they have) insufficient CPF savings to serve as (a) “source of income”?

The government said that the CPF Minimum Sum is computed to let Singaporeans “get a monthly payout of about $1,200 in 10 years’ time when (a person) reach(es) age 65″ and this is what they estimate would be what a “lower-middle income household would spend on daily living”. However, when the half of Singaporeans will get less than $425 and nearly 75% will get less than $600, this means that Singaporeans are getting drastically too little in payouts from the CPF! Does this mean that 90% of Singaporeans won’t even be able to retire on an income of a lower-middle income family? Most of us will retire in poverty! No wonder most Singaporeans have to keep working after retirement, and some even until they die!

Do Singaporeans has to be subjected to such torture? Does the government subjects themselves to the mistreatment that they heap onto its own citizens?

I also asked the government if they would increase the wages of Singaporeans and increase the CPF interest rates, so that our CPF will be able to grow.

The government also did not want to answer these questions.

So:

  1. Why did the government not want to give us the exact statistics of how much Singaporeans have inside our CPF? Now that we know that it is obvious that with the statistics that the government has at hand, they would know that the majority of Singaporeans would never be able to meet the CPF Minimum Sum, is that why they keep mum on the exact statistics?
  2. Why does the government refuse to increase wages and the CPF interest rates, knowing full well that Singaporeans’ CPF monies are not able to grow, because wages and the CPF interest rates have been kept stagnant?

Why did the government increase the CPF Minimum Sum to trap our CPF inside, and kept our wages and the CPF interest rates stagnant to continue trapping more of our CPF inside?

Do you see that something is terrible wrong with how the government is managing our CPF? Something is terribly, terribly wrong with how our CPF is being managed.

Singaporeans, do you see it?

3rd Edition Of The #ReturnOurCPF Event: Why Singaporeans Cannot Retire Because Of The HDB

It is time we take a stand and demand the truth from the government. The government has to stop pretending to us that they do not know what is going on, when it is clear that they would. It is also clear that they know the policies that they create will cut down on Singaporeans and victimise Singaporeans, then why does the government keep doing this? And why has the government been doing this for the past 20 years?

Something is terribly, terribly wrong in our country and with our government.

On 23 August, we will be organising the third edition of the #ReturnOurCPF event. In the first edition on June 7, we revealed to you the truths that the government has finally admitted to how they are using our CPF to invest in the GIC. In the second edition on 12 July, we exposed further truths about the exact number of Singaporeans who were not able to meet the CPF Minimum Sum.

Join us at the third edition and take a stand. It is time we demand the truth from the government and stop allowing the government from pushing us over. Enough is enough. How can they be allowed to bully us? Have we given so much of our rights away that we no longer have a voice and a say in how our own money is being handled?

You can join the Facebook event page here.

Also, my first court case will be held on 18 September 2014, at 10.00am. It will be a full-day hearing.

Return Our CPF 3 Poster Template with Text edited with Title

Return Our CPF 3 Poster Template with Text edited with Title@Chinese

Advertisements

58 comments

  1. 建国一代的孙儿

    When people suffer, and he took the sky-high salaries, that is a crime, we want prime lee step down now !
    当人民受苦, 而他拿天价的薪水, 就是在犯罪 !我们要李总理立刻下台。

    • thomas

      not only so, we demand Mrs.Lee to be tried, If she transfer of the interests of the states is not a crime, what means is a crime ?

      • 8点半新闻

        人家的月薪是用手点算的,李总理的月薪是用绳子捆绑拿回家的。就只他一个人的薪水,可以养活4百5百人口有余。不要说他的老婆财源广进。

        那么,他要这么多薪水,这样积极的敛财做什么呢?今天的即时报道说:“由于政府在提升国人的实际收入方面表现一般,担任政治职务者今年可领取的国家表现花红为1.618个月。” — 有谁不晓得[一般]的意思就是平庸的表现呢?政府的工作表现平庸,竟然还可以领取1.618个月的花红,这已经够吊诡。然而,更荒唐的是,世界上左右200个国家,有几个国家的政治领导人敢敢的凭着司法权力,把国家从赋税得来的民脂民膏拿来分红而不脸红呢?

        新闻说:“担任副总理至政务次长者都可获得这项花红。而由于李总理的薪金配套内不含表现花红部分,所以他可获得两倍的国家表现花红,即3.236个月。” — 大家或许不知道,所谓国家表现,就是全体新加坡人民的努力。新加坡国家的表现,竟然也能够为工作不达标、变现一般的政府带来花红,总理还要伸两手 — 嘿嘿,打着从政的幌子,掠夺国家的财富而已.

        Posted on 03月 26, 2012

    • JoannaQuek

      -Direct to Roy-

      When people suffer, and he still ask for donation and till now no news what happen to the money and article is getting worse and worse sooner or later more pple will leave you, if you are unable to provide a solution but instead complain.
      (return cpf to you is not a solution as you have to think what happen if you spend all away and left nothing? You want to see MORE old people begging in the street or sell tissue paper?)

      90% unable to meet (not government fault)
      50% only have $55000 (not government fault)
      50% only payout $425 (not government fault)

      If you have time to point finger on the government which actually had help us a lot why not you change your mindset and teach people how to manage their money and upgrade themselves to find better job? Instead of pointing finger at government.

      1. you don’t need to meet the min sum if you don’t have the money government never FORCE you to meet the sum
      2. when you have little CPF and have money outside you can always topup your CPF so that you can earn the 2.5% and get more when you retire
      3. If you don’t have the ideal sum inside your CPF you expect government to top up for you? so that you get more the $425/month.

      All this bullshit thing have nothing to do with CPF is all about yourself, if you cannot help yourself to upgrade then why blame government? Why you never blame your parents from giving birth to you??

      I also can’t reach the min sum but I have the cash on hand, I only have $7000 inside CPF ordinary account but I have the cash

      I earn only $2500 per month but i’m happy with my life and Singapore for keeping me safe.

      Why blame others when you yourself don’t help yourself?

      Like said when you don’t have money don’t go to restaurant just to have a plate of PLAIN rice, coffeeshop plain rice is cheaper
      why you need to do all this thing that actually doesn’t help yourself and HERE you still have the cheek to help others by misleading them?

      You can always write to me and I will teach you how to upgrade yourself and live a better life.

  2. kerpal

    You are on fire Roy! Keep it up and soon, I can even start to blame the government for the pathetic amount in my savings account!

  3. jasmine

    Keep it up Roy. As long as the government remains silent on these issues and insist on not providing the figures on our CPF, your version will of our CPF story will be the truth. The PAP faction and continue to smear and dishonour you, but as long as they don’t have the facts, their version will remain as a lie. I would believe in your words more than Tharman’s because it is obvious his claims like a man earning $1000 can afford a 3 roomer is an outlier case. Therefore his claims are more like fiction in some wonderland country that is certainly not Singapore.

    • JoannaQuek

      Why another want to know all Singaporean CPF? who give you the right to know how much I have inside my CPF??

      If you want to know your CPF just sign in your account and view them. Why you want to know all people cpf?? you go ask your friend and see if they will provide you how much they have inside their CPF, where the pinkie brain?

  4. How To Get Your CPF Money Back At 55

    I think the only way is to vote Opposition.
    There is no way a PAP government will ever give us back our CPF at 55 years old.
    Even though that was their original promise.

    It’s time to send a clear message to PAP.
    It’s time for Singaporeans to move forward without PAP.
    The talking is over.

  5. The Oracle

    Lies, damned lies and Roy’s statistics!

    Roy clearly didn’t like my reasoned answers under his previous blog post yesterday so instead he has to post pretty much the same thing again the next day?

    First, Roy ignores everything except cash in CPF accounts of people aged 55: “But realistically, we should only be looking at how much cash only we have inside our CPF, as we can only retire on the cash portion.”. There are many problems with this as Roy knows well but he is ignoring the facts to further his political agenda by painting a much more drastic picture than is the case. Just some of the missing facts (research and check for yourself on other sites):
    1) Over 90% of Singaporean households own their home.
    2) 80% of Singaporean homeowners aged 55 own their home without a mortgage.
    It is well known that many Singaporeans are “asset rich, cash poor” and many have withdrawn cash to pay their mortgage over the years. To say a person’s owned home is not an asset is disingenuous – it can be sold, rented out, or just a room rented out, or downgraded to smaller, or even the lease buy-back scheme. The truth is the majority of Singaporeans living in HDB units aged 55 have an asset that is worth on average $300,000 in the resale market. Even those that still have a mortgage usually have a very small one as they bought maybe 20 years ago and have paid most off by 55.
    3) Also ignored is the fact that many Singaporeans have assets outside of CPF – many have cash, shares, properties, insurance and pension products.
    4) How many people retire at 55? Many continue working until 65 or so. 55 is only the earliest point a person might retire and start withdrawing money under CPF Life and is not representative of the complete picture.

    I could go on but I think we all can see the picture – Roy has built his case by setting up a very narrow definition of what assets people have and then presents his preordained conclusions.

    • AxE Law

      40% of the voter didn’t really know what other countries is doing…
      They didn’t know that they have the one of the best world class party helping them to govern the country
      and yet complain this and that
      Guys why don’t you go talk to the FT in Singapore and make some friend in other foreign countries to know how is their life over there.

      • So Difficult To Govern Singapore Meh?

        @ AxE Law
        “They didn’t know that they have the one of the best world class party helping them to govern the country
        and yet complain this and that”

        – Is PAP a best world class party …. for the last 10 years ??
        – after all the expensive mentoring by the former Mentor Minister

        – What’s so difficult about governing Singapore?
        – Iskandar Development Region Malaysia in Johor is three times the size of Singapore

        – PAP’s Millionaire Ministers are the highest paid politicians in the world
        – Singapore’s General Elections are jokingly called “Who wants to be a Millionaire”
        – high pay and yet still so thin skinned. Sue … sue … sue.
        – such insecure “world best talents” – Sue …. sue … sue

      • So Difficult To Govern Singapore Meh?

        @ AxE Law
        “Guys why don’t you go talk to the FT in Singapore and make some friend in other foreign countries to know how is their life over there.”

        – PAP Millionaires are paid to govern Singapore.
        – and if PAP Millionaires find Singaporeans to be champion complainers and very difficult to govern … why not PAP go and govern some other foreign country

        – oops! I forgot. PAP and LKY did try to govern Malaysia. And got kicked out of the country.
        – so you see, Singapore is so easy to govern
        – and PAP has a proven track record of not being able to govern any other country.
        – Singaporeans are so easy to govern and bully … even PAP’s Founding Father LKY was calling us daft.

      • Axehasnoidea

        I’m a foreigner and where im from the gov throws free money at you, we have free healthcare, university loans that make it so you don’t pay out of your pocket to attend, our national minimum wage is 21sgd an hour. I find it really surprising how I keep finding people like you in Singapore who think they actually live in a country that’s ‘great’ and comparable to one like mine. It’s no wonder heaps of you migrate to my country.

      • The Oracle

        BS – I really don’t believe you are a foreigner as no foreigner I’ve ever spoken with would say “the gov throws free money at you”.

        There is NO SUCH THING as FREE MONEY – it has to come from somewhere. In the welfare countries in Europe it comes primarily from high taxation. Even ordinary factory workers in the UK end up paying 40% marginal tax and then also pay almost 10% of their gross income in “National Insurance” tax.

        The money is only “free” to the person receiving it but someone else pays.

      • More Oracle BS

        @ The Oracle, 1.59pm
        BS – Bull shit.
        In Singapore, BS has more credibility than PS.
        What is PS?
        Do you think PS means PAP Bullshit?
        What do you think?

    • Xmen

      @Oracle –

      I hate to repeat the same reply to you more than once.

      You claim that 80% of senior (age 55+) HDB owners have paid off their mortgages. What about those seniors who don’t own HDB flat but are living in their children’s flat? What about those seniors “renting” or living in government subsidized housing? You are excluding them in your 80%/20% stat right? This number is definitely nonzero and may well be over 20% of senior population.

      I included some analysis on singstat data in the previous post and you can go back to read it up.

      The 90.5 HDB ownership rate does not say anything about paid off mortgages. I am guessing the number of paid off mortgages is well under 50%. This number will only get worse over time. People used to have 10 year housing loan. Now it is 25-30 years. Soon they will need 50- or 100- year loans. (I am not kidding – check out Japan and China.)

      • The Oracle

        @Xmen

        The 90.5% home ownership rate is across all households in Singapore – both HDB and private but HDB stats give the % who have paid off HDB mortgages separately from this. Less than 10% of all households rent (and this includes the 2% of households in subsidized government accommodation). My previous 15% estimate of those who need more help at retirement assumed the majority of these renting households fall into this category.

        Some useful stats for our discussion:
        http://www.singstat.gov.sg/publications/publications_and_papers/household_income_and_expenditure/pp-s20.pdf

        I noted from the above that there are 110,000 households with no working person (9.4% of the total), of which 72,000 are retiree households (6.1% of the total). Of the households with no working person, 87% have regular non-work income. Income from non-work sources includes income from rental, investment, contribution from relatives/friends, social welfare grants (CPF), etc. This implies there are about 10,000 retiree households or 13% of the total with no income (some of whom may have an asset – their home – but we’ve covered that point).

        Beyond this, I think you and I will split hairs forever over what is the appropriate cut-off point income-wise but the answer to what percentage of retiree households need additional help is becoming clearer now at:
        1) 13%
        2) Minus those with a large enough home asset that may be monetised
        3) Plus those with inadequate income (and who also don’t have a home asset that may be monetised)
        Whatever the actual percentage is (although it is certainly not Roy’s 85%), I think we both agree more needs to be done for these people.

      • Xmen

        @Oracle,

        You have been citing numbers but using them randomly to come to a (random) conclusion. I will make it simple and debunk your conclusion from the two “facts” you provided –

        1) Over 90% of Singaporean households own their home.
        2) 80% of Singaporean homeowners aged 55 own their home without a mortgage.

        I will be generous here and assume that #1 applies to 55+ year old. Simply mathematics tells you that the 80% of 90% owners pay off their mortgage = 72% of the population. So the population of seniors not owning their home outright (i.e. paid off mortgages) is 28%. But the 28% number is generous as it does not account for multi-generation households where seniors are living in their children’s home. Further, typical senior education level is lower than average Singaporeans so you can expect their lifetime income to be lower.

        In any case, the number of seniors NOT meeting the minimum sum speaks volume about the misery out there. If minimum sum = poverty level, you will see that the retirement picture is ugly out there.

    • mustafa aka soapian

      Well yuu need to ask yourselves. Is Roy on a fact finding mission or a fault finding mission. To me its more of the later.

      • Xmen

        What’s the difference here? Roy is on a mission to find facts and the facts turn out to be faulty! 😉

    • Albert Foo

      You must be a high wage earner…..Let’s not talk about owing a house. You can own a house and for retirement you cannot even survive with the peanuts payout from CPF. What good is a house when you can’t survive. Land cost? House pricing?

  6. Deaf Frog's Toothpick

    inadequacies of the CPF

    1. Assumes that the large majority of the population can save enough for retirement.

    2. Assumes that when 1. fails, the property market can be inflated to make up for the difference.

    3. Assumes that home “ownership” and the subsequent monetisation of property is a good strategy for retirement, which is not necessarily true.

    for the low income, it’s all eggs in the same basket tied up in an illiquid and potential volatile asset. it’s almost like from putting all retirement funds into property speculation.

    left to it’s own, property market goes in cycles, what happens when someone retires in a down-cycle? just curse his luck? the retiree obviously do not have the option to wait out the down-cycle. leaving retirees to the mercy of the property cycle is not a good outcome.

    in a ageing population like ours, large groups of similar age will try to monetise at around the same time, if that happens the property market goes into over-supply and falls. strategy self-defeats.

    if over-supply threatens, political pressure might force the government to intervene in the property market to create artificial demand via immigrant influx, quality control of immigrants might be compromised because government will be stuck in dilemma between quantity and quality.

    4. which brings us back to point 1., large influx of low-mid quality immigrants in turn depress wages, resulting in the assumption that large majority of population being able to save enough for retirement moving yet further away.

    at the same time, massive influx of immigrants bring it’s own problems by adding to the grey tsunami when they grow old, at the same TFR, they make the absolute size of the problem bigger by making a tsunami produced by 5.3m into a tsunami produced by 6.9m.

    at the same TFR the solution is to accept yet more immigrants by raising the population to 8.9m(my conservative estimate).

    i am not saying i am right, if u disagree, feel free to discuss.

    • Deaf Frog's Toothpick

      if the government intervene in the property market to create artificial demand via immigrant influx and the process is mismanaged, it will result in a double whammy of depressed wages for the mid-low wage workers and raising property prices.

  7. Deaf Frog's Toothpick

    inadequacies of the CPF 2

    1. inflexibility, forcing ppl to accept low risk low return regardless of the person’t age and risk appetite.

    2. inflexibility, forcing low-mid wage earners to accept investment(some say speculation) of the only property they have as a strategy for retirement.

    3. Force the funds to accept inflation risk whenever the returns given by the government fails to beat inflation.

    3. For the low-mid wage earners, it’s unrealistic to expect them to have meaningful amounts of extra savings/investments outside CPF after using so much for housing and factoring in monthly CPF contribution.

    having high HDB prices reinforces the downward trend of TFR, as couple will simply have less children. stagnant TFR becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy?

    4. Illogical, minimum sum pegged to inflation(some say average hdb prices) but interest rate not pegged to inflation.

    5. Illogical, minimum sum pegged to ageing but HDB lease not pegged to ageing. when life expectancy in the 70s was 68+/- the lease was sold at 99 years, now the life expectancy is around 82+/-, the lease STILL sold at 99years, not logical.

    6. CPF funds are subjected to policy risk with little options for the member.

    7. Monetisation strategy requires high and ever rising rent+property prices, which is effective borrowing from future generation (and immigrants), the low-mid wage earners loses out in this situation but wealthy becomes richer as they can afford to speculate in multiple properties, strategy results in regressive wealth distribution.

  8. Pingback: Daily SG: 31 Jul 2014 | The Singapore Daily
  9. 他要挤干你的最后一滴血

    We appeal to all those who advocate justice and witness, Temasek Holdings, by accumulated the people’s CPF, totally deceptive statement that substitutes one thing for another , then perpetrating a fraud. the last, concluded that Temasek’s property is privately owned, obviously this government is engaged in fraud thing.我们呼吁一切主张正义的人士见证,淡马锡控股, 靠把人民的CPF堆起来,先移花接木,再偷梁换柱,最后说淡马锡控股的财产是私人所有,显然这个政府是在搞诈骗嘛。

    also my reply to Jim,
    Thousands of people from Justice !

  10. sintel

    no job, no income, no holiday, but must have good personality, they tell truth of our generations, they are heroes in Singapore, I supported Roy and Huihui until I die .

  11. Pingback: Why Singaporeans Cannot Save Enough In Our CPF: Learning From the IPS Forum | The Heart Truths
  12. Choosing & Voting Opposition Has Never Been This Easy

    Vote PAP and you know you won’t get your CPF money back at 55 years old.
    Vote PAP and you will also likely lose your job to an alien.
    Vote PAP and watch PAP government give away money to all the foreign students.
    Vote PAP and watch your children’s place in university get taken by foreign students.

    What are we waiting for?
    Vote Opposition!
    What do we have to lose?

  13. John

    People who complain about everything in life without appreciating what they have , even if the whole government is replaced by oppositions, they will start to complain about everything in no time.

  14. Pingback: 50 Truths Singaporeans Finally Know About Our CPF on Singapore’s 50th Birthday | The Heart Truths
  15. Pingback: More Evidence that Temasek Holdings Takes Our CPF to Invest! | The Heart Truths
  16. Pingback: 20140810 PM Lee’s National Day message confirms PAP’s disconnect with our issues | likedatosocanmeh
  17. Pingback: 20140810 PM Lee’s National Day message confirms PAP’s disconnect with our issues | likedatosocanmeh
  18. Pingback: How Much Interest Must Singaporeans Earn On Our CPF To Be Able To Meet The CPF Minimum Sum? | The Heart Truths
  19. Pingback: 我们的公积金户头需要赚取多少的利率回报才能够达到政府定下公积金最低存款额的要求吗? | The Heart Truths
  20. Pingback: 公积金户头需要赚取多少的利率回报才能达到最低存款额的要求? | The Heart Truths
  21. Pingback: 20140818 Vote PAP out the only way for CPF members to get back retirement savings | likedatosocanmeh
  22. Pingback: The Real History of the CPF and the Singapore Economy | The Heart Truths
  23. Pingback: What PAP Has Done to Your CPF and Doesn’t Want Singaporeans to Know (The Real History) | The Heart Truths
  24. Pingback: PMG: Portfolio Management Group » LEGITIMATE PROTEST
  25. Pingback: 行动党是如何操纵我们的公积金资金?为什么他们不让新加坡人民知道公积金的历史真相?《第一部分》 | The Heart Truths
  26. Pingback: [Comic] How Singapooreans are Tricked and Trapped | The Heart Truths
  27. Pingback: [漫画]新加坡人是如何被哄和被套牢的 | The Heart Truths
  28. Pingback: Most Singaporeans Get Only Less Than $100 Every Month from CPF Life? | The Heart Truths
  29. Pingback: 20141120 Retirement shortfall caused by PAP abusing CPF | likedatosocanmeh
  30. Pingback: The Truth about the CPF Advisory Panel’s Recommendations: PAP Never Wanted to Increase Our CPF at All | The Heart Truths
  31. Pingback: 20150207 PAP’s apology meaningless, time to let PAP retire | likedatosocanmeh
  32. Pingback: PAP’s apology meaningless, time to let PAP retire » Singapore Leading Financial Portal
  33. Pingback: This is How Much CPF Singaporeans can Save if the PAP did Not Take Our Interest Away | The Heart Truths
  34. Pingback: This is How Much CPF Singaporeans can Save if the PAP did Not Depress Our Wages | The Heart Truths
  35. Pingback: This is How Much CPF Singaporeans can Save if the PAP did Not Escalate Housing Prices | The Heart Truths
  36. Pingback: Latest CPF Recommendations: Still Trying to Make (You) Believe | The Heart Truths

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 )

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s