(17-06-2014, 08:16 AM)specuvestor Wrote: [ -> ]So I'm trying to understand your logic:
1) it doesn't matter if the society helps the poor or rich. Singapore's utility rebates for example should be uniform across the board?
2) we are entitled to get our CPF back... So you are proposing that we should get our money back but if we failed to manage our retirement the society should take care of us?
3) she is 76 years old, shifting of goal post in the past 14 years probably didn't affect her at all
1) I am more of the idea of raising taxes on the rich to fund social assistance programs... Not quite sure why you use the ultility rebates example because IMO PAP sold away our generators (that runs on gas) and bill us electricity pegged to oil rates... plus double taxation on water.... Leading to ever increasing utility bills despite similar consumption ... Basically inflating the cost for everyone and then throwing some rebates to the lower income to wayang that they are helping the poor...
2) I am of the view that not everyone will mismanage their retirement money... Using a few specific cases to justify locking up the money for everyone is wrong... IMO, govt should help fund social assistance program for those who fell through the crack... Some people may make mistakes in mismanaging their retirement money and thus require assistance... Should we not offer that assistance and penalize them further? Not talking about 3 meals in foodcourt or restaurant but enough assistance to help them with basic necessities...
3) Not quite sure the story of the 76 yr old... I am just enjoying the show of PAP IB smearing mud on the 76 yr old PAP supporter to discredit her claims on CPF...
(17-06-2014, 10:06 AM)Zelphon Wrote: [ -> ]2) I am of the view that not everyone will mismanage their retirement money... Using a few specific cases to justify locking up the money for everyone is wrong...
Agree not many people will mismanage. However, this is the same as driving. There are only a few reckless drivers on the roads causing accidents. Most of us are safe drivers. Do we then do away with all the traffic rules?
(17-06-2014, 10:06 AM)Zelphon Wrote: [ -> ]3) Not quite sure the story of the 76 yr old... I am just enjoying the show of PAP IB smearing mud on the 76 yr old PAP supporter to discredit her claims on CPF...
As I said before they will eat each other in order for their party to prevail regardless whether right or wrong will try to suppress or play down the issue you see some of that happen at this forum too. The ending part of that video woman in cheongsam behavior has shocked a lot of people too and it has also gone viral on facebook already congrats.
here's another recent story.
http://therealsingapore.com/content/dear...assed-away
(17-06-2014, 10:45 AM)level13 Wrote: [ -> ] (17-06-2014, 10:06 AM)Zelphon Wrote: [ -> ]2) I am of the view that not everyone will mismanage their retirement money... Using a few specific cases to justify locking up the money for everyone is wrong...
Agree not many people will mismanage. However, this is the same as driving. There are only a few reckless drivers on the roads causing accidents. Most of us are safe drivers. Do we then do away with all the traffic rules?
Actually, I am fine with the original intention of CPF and its rules... But the rules keep on changing so drastically... Singapore only 49 yrs old this year, but CPF already shifted the goal post so much that it is perceived that we will never get back our money...
(17-06-2014, 11:01 AM)sgd Wrote: [ -> ] (17-06-2014, 10:06 AM)Zelphon Wrote: [ -> ]3) Not quite sure the story of the 76 yr old... I am just enjoying the show of PAP IB smearing mud on the 76 yr old PAP supporter to discredit her claims on CPF...
As I said before they will eat each other in order for their party to prevail regardless whether right or wrong will try to suppress or play down the issue you see some of that happen at this forum too. The ending part of that video woman in cheongsam behavior has shocked a lot of people too and it has also gone viral on facebook already congrats.
here's another recent story.
http://therealsingapore.com/content/dear...assed-away
Does the statement mean voices has been suppressed, regardless of right or wrong in this forum? It serves as defamation to moderators of our forum.
In a debate, each side will present their view, might be biased, but it shouldn't be viewed as "regardless whether right or wrong", unless it is proven.
All views are welcome, but not for baseless accusation.
Please provide ground on the statement.
Regards
Moderator
(17-06-2014, 11:27 AM)CityFarmer Wrote: [ -> ] (17-06-2014, 11:01 AM)sgd Wrote: [ -> ] (17-06-2014, 10:06 AM)Zelphon Wrote: [ -> ]3) Not quite sure the story of the 76 yr old... I am just enjoying the show of PAP IB smearing mud on the 76 yr old PAP supporter to discredit her claims on CPF...
As I said before they will eat each other in order for their party to prevail regardless whether right or wrong will try to suppress or play down the issue you see some of that happen at this forum too. The ending part of that video woman in cheongsam behavior has shocked a lot of people too and it has also gone viral on facebook already congrats.
here's another recent story.
http://therealsingapore.com/content/dear...assed-away
Does the statement mean voices has been suppressed, regardless of right or wrong in this forum? It serves as defamation to moderators of our forum.
In a debate, each side will present their view, might be biased, but it shouldn't be viewed as "regardless whether right or wrong", unless it is proven.
All views are welcome, but not for baseless accusation.
Please provide ground on the statement.
Regards
Moderator
suppression of the "negative" not voice nothing to do with moderators but some who are not even moderators are trying act as moderator.
I am perfectly fine with limiting his forum to purely investing topics. I'm sick of the hypocrisy anyway. People claim to speak of behalf of the disadvantaged when they are really talking about their own concerns.
Suppression of the negative? or is it voicing out against untrue statements and half truths and lies.
(17-06-2014, 01:31 PM)tanjm Wrote: [ -> ]I am perfectly fine with limiting his forum to purely investing topics. I'm sick of the hypocrisy anyway. People claim to speak of behalf of the disadvantaged when they are really talking about their own concerns.
old lady begging and crying in public on video, facts in open but all are untrue and lies .. oh ok
So that is your criteria for assessing what is true and false?
Just need to be old, beg and cry in public and its true?
(17-06-2014, 01:44 PM)sgd Wrote: [ -> ]old lady begging and crying in public on video, facts in open but all are untrue and lies .. oh ok