Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 90

Thread: pm vs blogger

  1. #1

    Default pm vs blogger

    Hmmm ... rather surprised that no one discuss about this interesting piece of news over here. Any views or comments?

  2. #2
    Moderator catchlights's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Punggol, Singapore
    Posts
    21,901

    Default Re: pm vs blogger

    Quote Originally Posted by keiser View Post
    Hmmm ... rather surprised that no one discuss about this interesting piece of news over here. Any views or comments?
    can you discuss this without bring in politic?
    Shoot to Live, Live to Shoot
    www.benjaminloo.com | iStock portfolio

  3. #3

    Default Re: pm vs blogger

    Quote Originally Posted by keiser View Post
    Hmmm ... rather surprised that no one discuss about this interesting piece of news over here. Any views or comments?
    rather surprised that as a member since 2011, you're not aware of the rules in kopitiam.
    Objection !!!

  4. #4

    Default Re: pm vs blogger

    Quote Originally Posted by catchlights View Post
    can you discuss this without bring in politic?
    Sure, in fact in my personal view, the very core is really some concerns over certain cpf policies and its governance rather than politics … for example, , I admit that it felt it little weird after learning that one has to pay back interest on the drawn down amount upon selling a house to the cpf board (btw, could someone here confirm this?)… Hmmm … perhaps it was originally designed with our interest in mind, to reduce speculation on residential properties?
    Last edited by keiser; 30th May 2014 at 06:15 PM.

  5. #5

    Default Re: pm vs blogger

    Yes, there are many people like yourself who don't know about this - until they sell their HDB flats It may come as a shock, followed by suspicions as to its validity & purpose. If you check your CPF account statement, you will see the CPF used for property purchased & the "interests" computed which are to be paid back to the CPF eventually. This rule has been in effect since the very beginning. If you leave the money in the CPF, the CPF will pay interests on it meaning your CPF funds will grow, to provide for your old age, which is what CPF is fundamentally about. If withdrawn, used, or "borrowed" (whichever way you want to see it) for property purchase, it has to be returned with interests to preserve this intent & purpose. Imagine you withdrawn $20K 40 years ago & return back the same 40 years later without the interests, how much would you have in your CPF for retirement? This is tied to concept of countering or rather providing for inflation. So this is a practical & benign concept for the benefit of the people & to protect their retirement nest eggs. Its not related to property speculation. There is nothing sinister about this.

    In the last major economic crisis of 1997 when the humongous property bubble burst, many HDB owners who sold their flats were unable to return this CPF + interests. This was because property prices have plunged so very drastically that sales proceeds were insufficient to pay back HDB/bank loans & even CPF (who stand 2nd in line in any repayment). Thousands of HDB owners faced insolvency, bankruptcy. The Govt then bend backward, amended the rule at that time so that people do not need to cover the CPF shortfall to avoid this disastrous prospect. Many measures were subsequently implemented to rein in property speculation & property bubbles from building up, to avoid a repeat. But many people never learn or forgotten the lessons (or are too young to know & understand) in their desire for making fast & easy money from speculation.

    I haven't read what the blogger written but I hope its not misrepresentation or misinformation on this CPF. Your thread title is a politically loaded statement in current context. A legal suit is pending, or in progress, so better not comment on it here.



    Quote Originally Posted by keiser View Post
    Sure, in fact in my personal view, the very core is really some concerns over certain cpf policies and its governance rather than politics … for example, , I admit that it felt it little weird after learning that one has to pay back interest on the drawn down amount upon selling a house to the cpf board (btw, could someone here confirm this?)… Hmmm … perhaps it was originally designed with our interest in mind, to reduce speculation on residential properties?
    Last edited by s1221ljc; 31st May 2014 at 12:22 PM.

  6. #6
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    In the void.
    Posts
    1,322

    Default Re: pm vs blogger

    Quote Originally Posted by keiser View Post
    Sure, in fact in my personal view, the very core is really some concerns over certain cpf policies and its governance rather than politics for example, , I admit that it felt it little weird after learning that one has to pay back interest on the drawn down amount upon selling a house to the cpf board (btw, could someone here confirm this?) Hmmm perhaps it was originally designed with our interest in mind, to reduce speculation on residential properties?
    This is the part that's misleading. You dun actually 'pay' anything. It's more like you set aside whatever you could have gained from interest back into cpf. There isn't any conspiracy at all, in the end what you put back is still your money. The arguement is about whether you let your money get tied up in cpf until you are 55 or rather you have cash in hand. The thing is, if you have cash in hand, and you put it in investments, you have got to be investment savvy to beat the 2.6% return on cpf.

  7. #7

    Default

    Too many allegations in that roy ngerng

  8. #8

    Default Re: pm vs blogger

    Alleging, accusing, a person of incompetence or negligence, even gross stupidity, may be acceptable, but slandering or defaming that person by insinuating, saying he is dishonest & has committed a criminal act is not. Especially if its against a prominent person holding high public office who seriously values integrity, trust, honour & reputation. Unless one has proof.

    Quote Originally Posted by kei1309 View Post
    Too many allegations in that roy ngerng

  9. #9
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    In the void.
    Posts
    1,322

    Default Re: pm vs blogger

    Quote Originally Posted by s1221ljc View Post
    Alleging, accusing, a person of incompetence or negligence, even gross stupidity, may be acceptable, but slandering or defaming that person by insinuating, saying he is dishonest & has committed a criminal act is not. Especially if its against a prominent person holding high public office who seriously values integrity, trust, honour & reputation. Unless one has proof.
    Actually no, accusing somebody of incompetence/negligence should not be acceptable at all, it is still considered slander or libel. Especially in professional circles (ie: engineering) being negligent or incompetent is cause for a criminal charge. You may argue about policies and give statements on their effectiveness or relevance, that is your value judgement. But when you say something about someone which you know is not true, nor in position to know whether it is true, that's wrong.

  10. #10

    Default Re: pm vs blogger

    Note my "may be" Of course if its against professionals like lawyers or doctors, may not be, but if against some other service providers? Perhaps you never in your life accuse anyone an incompetent fool or bungling idiot Obnoxious, odious maybe but not a legal offence.

    Quote Originally Posted by Prismatic View Post
    Actually no, accusing somebody of incompetence/negligence should not be acceptable at all, it is still considered slander or libel. Especially in professional circles (ie: engineering) being negligent or incompetent is cause for a criminal charge. You may argue about policies and give statements on their effectiveness or relevance, that is your value judgement. But when you say something about someone which you know is not true, nor in position to know whether it is true, that's wrong.
    Last edited by s1221ljc; 1st June 2014 at 02:05 AM.

  11. #11
    Moderator Octarine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Pasir Ris
    Posts
    12,422

    Default Re: pm vs blogger

    Quote Originally Posted by s1221ljc View Post
    Alleging, accusing, a person of incompetence or negligence, even gross stupidity, may be acceptable, but slandering or defaming that person by insinuating, saying he is dishonest & has committed a criminal act is not. Especially if its against a prominent person holding high public office who seriously values integrity, trust, honour & reputation. Unless one has proof.
    Especially this part requires ruling by a judge an a proper court proceeding. Obviously nothing like this happened. So what he did was a perfect assist to the lawyers of PM to whack him. In soccer terms: own goal. Too sad it will be darn expensive lesson learned for him.
    On the other hand: I still miss some instinct on the side of PM in such cases.
    Last edited by Octarine; 2nd June 2014 at 10:36 AM.
    EOS

  12. #12

    Default Re: pm vs blogger

    I see ... thanks ... will take note of it and your other points should I decided buy or sell a house

    Quote Originally Posted by s1221ljc View Post
    Yes, there are many people like yourself who don't know about this - until they sell their HDB flats It may come as a shock, followed by suspicions as to its validity & purpose. If you check your CPF account statement, you will see the CPF used for property purchased & the "interests" computed which are to be paid back to the CPF eventually. This rule has been in effect since the very beginning. If you leave the money in the CPF, the CPF will pay interests on it meaning your CPF funds will grow, to provide for your old age, which is what CPF is fundamentally about. If withdrawn, used, or "borrowed" (whichever way you want to see it) for property purchase, it has to be returned with interests to preserve this intent & purpose. Imagine you withdrawn $20K 40 years ago & return back the same 40 years later without the interests, how much would you have in your CPF for retirement? This is tied to concept of countering or rather providing for inflation. So this is a practical & benign concept for the benefit of the people & to protect their retirement nest eggs. Its not related to property speculation. There is nothing sinister about this.

    In the last major economic crisis of 1997 when the humongous property bubble burst, many HDB owners who sold their flats were unable to return this CPF + interests. This was because property prices have plunged so very drastically that sales proceeds were insufficient to pay back HDB/bank loans & even CPF (who stand 2nd in line in any repayment). Thousands of HDB owners faced insolvency, bankruptcy. The Govt then bend backward, amended the rule at that time so that people do not need to cover the CPF shortfall to avoid this disastrous prospect. Many measures were subsequently implemented to rein in property speculation & property bubbles from building up, to avoid a repeat. But many people never learn or forgotten the lessons (or are too young to know & understand) in their desire for making fast & easy money from speculation.

    I haven't read what the blogger written but I hope its not misrepresentation or misinformation on this CPF. Your thread title is a politically loaded statement in current context. A legal suit is pending, or in progress, so better not comment on it here.

  13. #13

    Default Re: pm vs blogger

    Thks, I see your point … but even though it is still "my" money in the end … to me “cash” in the pocket is not the same as a “promise to pay” … Hmm … instead of merely focusing on higher yield most of the time, wouldn’t it also help if the authorities bring the inflation rate lower instead e.g. perhaps slower but healthier growth over longer period of time?

    Quote Originally Posted by Prismatic View Post
    This is the part that's misleading. You dun actually 'pay' anything. It's more like you set aside whatever you could have gained from interest back into cpf. There isn't any conspiracy at all, in the end what you put back is still your money. The arguement is about whether you let your money get tied up in cpf until you are 55 or rather you have cash in hand. The thing is, if you have cash in hand, and you put it in investments, you have got to be investment savvy to beat the 2.6% return on cpf.
    Last edited by keiser; 2nd June 2014 at 02:21 PM.

  14. #14

    Default Re: pm vs blogger

    So you would suggest that comments and opinions should always be expressed more objectively?

    Quote Originally Posted by Octarine View Post
    Especially this part requires ruling by a judge an a proper court proceeding. Obviously nothing like this happened. So what he did was a perfect assist to the lawyers of PM to whack him. In soccer terms: own goal. Too sad it will be darn expensive lesson learned for him.
    On the other hand: I still miss some instinct on the side of PM in such cases.

  15. #15
    Senior Member Kit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Upper Bukit Timah
    Posts
    11,669

    Default Re: pm vs blogger

    A truthful clarification will show character. An opportunity lost.

    Like CSJ said, a defamation suit can only repair reputation, not character.

  16. #16

    Default

    Government sues her citizen..... hmmmm...

  17. #17

    Default Re: pm vs blogger

    Quote Originally Posted by -120- View Post
    Government sues her citizen..... hmmmm...
    How so?? The PM is not the Government, and can be sued and/or sue others like any other individuals.

  18. #18
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    In the void.
    Posts
    1,322

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by keiser View Post
    Thks, I see your point … but even though it is still "my" money in the end … to me “cash” in the pocket is not the same as a &ldquoromise to pay” … Hmm … instead of merely focusing on higher yield most of the time, wouldn’t it also help if the authorities bring the inflation rate lower instead e.g. perhaps slower but healthier growth over longer period of time?
    Your statement is kind of ironic actually (no offense intended). Cash as paper money is essentially a 'promise to pay' the bearer of the note the value indicated on the note.

    My personal opinion is that the ongoing hoohah has become less of the merits/demerits of the cpf system, or even a constructive discussion on the workings on the policy. It's more like an afterthough to divert the attention from the case at hand.

  19. #19
    Member Foxshade's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    In cat's stomach
    Posts
    849

    Default Re: pm vs blogger

    Heh, can we discuss this without touching politics? Let's try.

    If we don't take sides, Roy is clearly in the wrong. It's pretty much an easy lawsuit case. Why it has become a media circus, is all thanks to Roy's lawyer for turning the table.

    Roy can't be that smart. He wrote that dangerous, unsubstantiated piece in the first place. His whole act become smarter after he engaged the lawyer.

    If I were the PM, I'd sack my lawyer and get that one or someone who is as smart. I do believe late mdm. Lee was a partner of a strong law firm? She stepped down after Snr. Lee became PM, scared of conflict of interest. Why didn't he get them instead?
    Last edited by Foxshade; 2nd June 2014 at 05:07 PM.
    A true photograph need not be explained, nor can it be contained in words.
    ~Ansel Adams

  20. #20
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    9,807
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default Re: pm vs blogger

    Quote Originally Posted by catchlights View Post
    can you discuss this without bring in politic?
    Can ..... but still have to refer to terms like garmen, erection, etc...... OK?




    .
    Last edited by Zenten; 2nd June 2014 at 06:28 PM.
    Nikomi Canpen Zenten :eek:
    Not exactly 100% Natural but definitely the closest you can get to it

Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •