TR EMERITUS

The property developers are crying foul. The cooling measures must be lifted. To them, property prices must go one way, up and up. And the only thing good about the property investment game is to let property price to go as high as it possibly could. I fully agree with this kind of thinking if I am a property developer or property churning investor. It makes good sense and very good profit when property prices shoot to the sky. As a govt, there are other considerations and the interests of the people, the rich and the poor, at stake. A govt cannot allow property prices to run crazy except those who have a vested interest to want it so. There were some missteps by the govt by allowing property prices to spiral out of control and causing a lot of hardship, and an extremely high price system that is no longer sustainable. The property prices are way too high against the income of the average citizens and are eating away their income. Fortunately the govt is having second thought in spite of the pressure from the property developers. If the property developers are allowed to set the agenda, the rich of the world and property speculators would all be here to buy up everything and we just don’t have enough properties to sell to them. They could literally buy up the whole island in a laissez faire, anything goes system. We are just too small to play the property investment game in the world market. The govt must review its policies on the property market and come out with a clear policy direction it wants to take. Unless it can create a dual market where the citizens can be protected from the world’s super rich, to be able to afford properties within their means and not priced out of reach, allowing a free and unrestrained property market will create a very grave situation for the average citizens. The govt may want to introduce more cooling measures instead, to keep properties at a sustainable level for the citizens and not to allow cheap money to create havoc to the lives of its citizens. We may have reached a saturation point in the amount of properties we can afford to sell to the speculators and investors of the world. To bring in the speculators of the world into this island is sheer madness and irresponsible. The property developers must not be allowed to call the shot on how the property market should develop. Their only concern is profit and do not have to bother about the lives of the citizens and how an uncontrolled property market could make life unbearable and unaffordable to the ordinary citizens. They don’t have to care. They should go and compete in the world market, develop their properties all over the world in the same way Singaporeans are told to go overseas. The sheer size of our population will create a squeeze that will be unbearable if the property market is as open as our immigration policies. The average citizens will be screwed real hard and skewered by the property developers and speculators. This simply cannot be allowed.   Chua Chin Leng aka redbean * The writer blogs at http://mysingaporenew.blogspot.com    Read More →

S R Nathan At his 90th birthday celebrations (not that we care!), ex-President S R said that working with Lee Hsien Loong was the most positive aspect of his term: "I experienced directly, his warmth, and his understanding nature, something which cannot always be communicated through public gatherings." Why, of course, Lee is cordial only to those who see eye to eye with him. If you disagree with him or step on his tail, you get: 1. Sued for not a derisory amount of money and/or sacked from your job; 2. Harassed and investigated by the ISD. And oh by the way, hasn't Nathan said whatever he wanted to say in his book and post-presidency interviews with the state media? Is this another attempt to fashion an image for Lee as a "caring" and "listening" Prime Minister?   The Alternative View [source]: https://www.facebook.com/pages/The-Alternative-View/358759327518739   Related CNA news: S R Nathan expresses gratitude to Singapore leaders he worked with http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/s-r-nathan-expresses/1233624.html SINGAPORE: At his 90th birthday celebrations on Thursday evening, former President S R Nathan spoke warmly of the years he worked closely with Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong. He said he came to know Mr Lee well, both as a colleague and a personal friend. Mr Nathan said: "I experienced directly, his warmth, and his understanding nature, something which cannot always be communicated through public gatherings. Working with him was among the most positive aspects of my presidential term, and for that I thank you, Mr Prime Minister." Mr Nathan's celebration was attended by more than 700 guests at the Shangri-La hotel. His thank you speech named several of Singapore's founding fathers - former Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew, and the late Dr Goh Keng Swee and Mr S Rajaratnam -- both former deputy prime ministers.      Read More →

The MediShield Life Review Committee in its Report dated 23 June 2014 said: "Distributing Premiums More Evenly Over Lifetime. Our Committee also heard concerns that the elderly could have a problem affording MediShield Life premiums, because the premiums would increase with age. We therefore recommend that premiums be distributed more evenly throughout one’s life, i.e. higher premiums during working age, so that premiums rise by less in old age. In addition, policyholders currently only start receiving premium rebates (which reduce the net premium) from 71 years old. We recommend starting the premium rebates earlier at age 66. This will enable Singaporeans who have just retired or are near retirement to start benefiting from having paid premiums ahead when they were younger." The stated rationale for pre-funding doesn't make sense. Medisave Balance Is Key, Not Current Income A person pays his MediShield Life premium using the money in his Medisave account. Although his Medisave account is funded primarily from his employment income (the other sources being the occasional Government voucher or the rare bequests), it is his Medisave balance rather than his current income that is crucial in ensuring that he is able to pay his and/or his family's MediShield Life premiums year after year, through any unemployment and retirement. Otherwise, he should be exempted from paying any premium when he is unemployed or retired. For a person earning a given stream of employment income, his ability to pay the increasingly higher MediShield Life premiums as he ages is the same with or without pre-funding. Pre-funding is superficial and in reality changes nothing. Pre-Funding Irrelevant Pre-funding MediShield Life doesn't help the individual. If he is required to pre-fund by, say, $200 in a particular year, this pre-funded premium is not used by MediShield Life in that year, but will be invested in special issues of Government securities and grow annually at 4 per cent (the current Medisave interest rate, excluding the additional 1 per cent). If this pre-funded premium is drawn down in, say, 40 years' time, it would have grown to $960. If instead the person is allowed to keep the $200 in his Medisave account, it would also have grown to $960 (provided he hasn't used any of it, see next section). There are no financial or tax advantages in pre-funding. Medisave Money Can't Be Frittered Away Unlike money in a person's Ordinary account, which may be used for housing, investment, education etc., the money in his Medisave account may be used for certain allowable medical expenses only. When a person uses his Medisave money to meet his and/or his family's medical expenses, it is not something that he enjoys doing. For him, pre-funding MediShield Life leaves him with less money in his Medisave account. Without pre-funding, he has more Medisave money to meet his and/or his family's medical needs but perhaps less for his MediShield Life premiums when he is older. Either way, his combined cumulative premiums and Medisave-funded medical expenses do not change, unless with less Medisave money (after pre-funding) he may have to forgo some medical treatments. WHY THE GOVERNMENT WANTS PRE-FUNDING I believe there are two reasons why the Government wants MediShield Life premiums to be pre-funded, neither of which has been enunciated by the Government or the Committee (to the best of my knowledge). Longevity Insurance There is a pre-determined age at which people will stop pre-funding MediShield Life and start drawing down on their pre-funded balances. The Committee recommends it to be set at age 66. The cumulative pre-funded balances will grow year by year until the cohort reaches the age of 66. At that point, the pre-funded balances are at their maximum. Thereafter, they will decline as the pre-funded balances are used to partially pay the yearly premiums. The nearer to age 66 when a person dies, the more pre-funded premium he leaves behind for others in his cohort. With pre-funding, people who die early subsidise the MediShield Life premiums of other people in their age cohort who outlive them. But that should not be the objective of MediShield Life, which should be confined to risk pooling to protect policyholders against large hospital bills and expensive treatment of chronic conditions. Neither is it fair. The dead should not be required to subsidise the hospitalisation costs of the living. Being Forced To Help With participation in MediShield Life being mandatory, the Government is almost compelled to help any person who cannot afford to pay his premiums. Pre-funding reduces the likelihood that, or the extent to which, the Government would have to subsidise the premiums of the elderly poor.   RainMaker * The author blogs at refocusing.blogspot.sg      Read More →