Roy Ngerng should not retract his article and say sorry to the PM!!

[KNNBNBCB]

You think it is so easy to leave, is it? The vast majority cannot afford to leave. If New Zealand were to offer to accept anyone from sinkapore who applies, you can bet that the vast majority wll leave for New Zealand.

Remember most of the white south africans are the rich ones ...that's why they can afford to leave.

Speak for yourself

New Zealand is a country which I don't even bother visiting for a tour.

 

[Leongsam]

I have to remind you that you had used the words "vast majority". The last time I checked, Malaysia, China and South Africa were not emptied of half their population.

Nowhere did I say the "vast majority" have left. I said they are leaving in droves. The term "vast majority" was used by another member in the singapore context.

 

[tanwahp]

Nowhere did I say the "vast majority" have left. I said they are leaving in droves. The term "vast majority" was used by another member in the singapore context.

Yes but you quoted him as follows:

The question then has to be asked as to why the vast majority don't want to leave. Could it be that things aren't really that bad despite the grumbling?

The point is that emigration does not totally correlate to happenings in the country. Obviously Japanese aren't happy with their government compared to Singaporeans, but Japanese hardly migrate.

 

[freedalas]

You forget that CPF is a government initiative created for the sake of ensuring that Singaporeans have sufficient savings for their old age. The government also mandated that employers MUST contribute to an employees CPF too so it is pretty obvious that the government has the interest of Singaporean employees at heart.

Since the scheme is created by the government, they have every right to call the shots when it comes to how the retirement savings are managed.

However, there is nothing to stop any Singaporean from creating their own retirement saving fund. He can give a portion of his salary to his father, his uncle, his auntie or to a bank or financial institution. When he turns 55 or any other milestone age that he chooses, he can help himself to the all the money accrued over the years.

Someone (believe it's Scroobal) already pointed out that it was the British that started the CPF scheme, not the PAP. In starting CPF, the British had the genuine interest of Singaporeans at heart, to provide for them in their old age. In other words, the British for all intent and purposes would return the compulsory savings back to Singaporeans. But when the PAP took over CPF, it started all sorts of devious ways to retain our CPF monies for their own selfish purposes and for as long as possible.

True the government has the legal right to call the shots in managing the scheme. No one disputes that. What is at issue here is the PAP abusing its legal right in delaying withdrawals by imposing all sorts of condition in order to keep our CPF monies as long as it can, and this the PAP had been doing by continuously shifting the goal post - increasing the minimum sum year by year, extending the withdrawal age year by year. Isn't so damn clear that the PAP has no intention to return to the people their CPF monies?

 

[Hans168]

Roy has done NO wrong in asking these CPF uestions which all of us wanted to know!!!!!!!!!!

Is gahmen hiding facts from us??

 

[ACMILAN]

Roy has done NO wrong in asking these CPF uestions which all of us wanted to know!!!!!!!!!!

Is gahmen hiding facts from us??

Instead of clarifying, they use libel suit.

 

[Hans168]

If people like Roy are allowed to make outlandish claims without any evidence whatsoever, the confidence in the Singapore system would be undermined with dire consequences.

For example millionaires who wish to park their riches in the country may think twice if they harbour doubts about the financial strength and stability of the government. Corporations would be hesitant too. Many set up HQs in Singapore because of currency stability and prudent financial management by the PAP.

I fully support LHL's demands for an apology and a retraction. Roy does not have a shred of evidence to support his utterances. If he did he would have presented it for the public to see.

How would you like it if someone started spreading lies about you being a pedophile or serial rapist just because he doesn't like you. Would you take it lying down? I certainly wouldnC't.C

Cunt the pinky asshole just give factual statements to points raised or implied by Roy?
Show us the other side of the coin..
W(ho)TF says govt can use public fund to sue its taxpayer?

 

[Leongsam]

unt the pinky asshole just give factual statements to points raised or implied by Roy?
Show us the other side of the coin..
Who TF says govt can use public fund to sue its taxpayer?

The government is not suing. LHL is suing in his personal capacity.

 

[Hans168]

Someone (believe it's Scroobal) already pointed out that it was the British that started the CPF scheme, not the PAP. In starting CPF, the British had the genuine interest of Singaporeans at heart, to provide for them in their old age. In other words, the British for all intent and purposes would return the compulsory savings back to Singaporeans. But when the PAP took over CPF, it started all sorts of devious ways to retain our CPF monies for their own selfish purposes and for as long as possible.

True the government has the legal right to call the shots in managing the scheme. No one disputes that. What is at issue here is the PAP abusing its legal right in delaying withdrawals by imposing all sorts of condition in order to keep our CPF monies as long as it can, and this the PAP had been doing by continuously shifting the goal post - increasing the minimum sum year by year, extending the withdrawal age year by year. Isn't so damn clear that the PAP has no intention to return to the people their CPF monies?

Strange that by studying in LSE Goh KS became british............

 

[Hans168]

The government is not suing. LHL is suing in his personal capacity.

Why the noose says PM suiing Roy N...?

 

[Infantry]

Why the noose says PM suiing Roy N...?

The Noose is a joke.

 

[Leongsam]

Why the noose says PM suiing Roy N...?

The news says PM Lee is suing. Nowhere did the news say that the government was suing.

 

[DuYunQi]

Doesn't it seem very strange that pappies keep changing the rules and the requirements on everything that they feel they need to?

I remember they changed boundaries of constituents when it came to GEs, and when it comes to CPF, it was changed from ONE account... to now what we have as Ordinary, Special and MediSave.

I won't focus on the GE and boundary change they did.. but CPF.. is CPF not like a binding contract between the govt and the members of CPF.. Singaporeans? In a contract, if terms and anything are to be changed, aren't not the permission of both parties needed for it to go through? Did CPF board seek permission from all it's members when ONE account was changed to 3? Did it seek the permission of it's members when it changed from full withdrawal to now instalment? And did it seek permission when it came out with the minimum sum?

If a "No" is for all or any of the above.. then I would think that there is some sort of breach.. yes?
Can legal action be taken against CPF board, or even the govt for such breaches?

 

[halsey02]

Someone (believe it's Scroobal) already pointed out that it was the British that started the CPF scheme, not the PAP. In starting CPF, the British had the genuine interest of Singaporeans at heart, to provide for them in their old age. In other words, the British for all intent and purposes would return the compulsory savings back to Singaporeans. But when the PAP took over CPF, it started all sorts of devious ways to retain our CPF monies for their own selfish purposes and for as long as possible.

True the government has the legal right to call the shots in managing the scheme. No one disputes that. What is at issue here is the PAP abusing its legal right in delaying withdrawals by imposing all sorts of condition in order to keep our CPF monies as long as it can, and this the PAP had been doing by continuously shifting the goal post - increasing the minimum sum year by year, extending the withdrawal age year by year. Isn't so damn clear that the PAP has no intention to return to the people their CPF monies?

Clap!, clap!, clap!.....best I have ever heard...but are the 60% listening?? every I wake & shudder hoping not to find out that the PAP managed CPF funds is now denominated in the "Japanese Bananas Dollars"...MY hard earned, blood, sweat & tears money..& I wake up to find out that, the withdrawal age is now 99 years of age.... can withdraw SOME at 55 years of age....but only maybe a few thousand dollars & have to wait till I am 99 for each passing year, more "goal posts"...shifting...nobody to control them.