Can you imagine what all this money could have done for the NEEDY in SINGAPORE??

[Hope]

ok, i can take over ho ching, pls ask her to step down. i can also lose billions with a fraction of her salary. hell, if i juz leave the money in fixed deposits, i can out perform her.

btw, i don't know there's a good side to losing billions. care to enlighten?

Me too,I probably can give $400 million to that Aussie Con-Man,not Durex who was praised sky high by Madam HO and confirmed by Sinkies Judges as one huge Con-Man.but an Aussie con-man

Is it that difficult?of course I may not know for sure,I have never lost billions,hehe,thanks GOD!

 

[miosux]

So do you rather pay 40% tax to feed them? Thanks but no thanks.

The $2 billion, you win some here, you lose some elsewhere. No big deal. At least we keep the money as assets (rise or fall) rather than play Robbing Hood.

we pay $600m in maid's levy, a billion in tobacco tax, a few million here for TV license, a few million there for radio license in car etc etc... sure we don't pay 40% income tax, but add in all the license fees etc, we might be getting close to that.

And playing "Robbing Hood" has been one of the fundamental roles of the State - it's called the redistribution of wealth through taxes (in any shape or form).

anyway i'm glad the PAP is screwing the people over, they deserve every ounce of this government they voted for.

 

[n01215]

since you attacked him over lack of substance, why dont you show us some facts to balance out the original post's one sidedness?

i admit i dont know nuts abt temasek's performace but how about some figures of how under HO CHING (and not in its entire history) temasek has performed compared to other government investment companies, such as China's/Japan's/USA's?

Also, someone siad might as well put into fixed deposit... What is the ROA of temasek holdings under Ho Ching? Is it really lower than fixed deposit rate?

his thread is not without substance but without balance... purely out to undermine.

dont believe what i say. google for the facts.

 

[cass888]

anyway i'm glad the PAP is screwing the people over, they deserve every ounce of this government they voted for.

Just because you think you may be screwed doesn't mean the PAP is screwing the people. The policies (high cost of housing - high resale prices benefit the 95% who ALREADY HAVE flats) low taxes (relatively despite all your claims) etc all benefit the majority of the centre, and in case you haven't noticed, it is the centre, not the extremely rich or extremely poor who make or break the government.

 

[leetahbar]

Can you imagine what all this money could have done for the NEEDY in SINGAPORE??


Temasek lost almost US$2 billion of a badly-timed US$3 billion in Shin
Corp
at a peak of 49.25 baht(Shin shares are now trading at around 15 baht)
in
2006.

This state-linked investment company committed S$401
million in ASX -listed ABC Learning Centres at near the peak price of
A$7.30 and then averaged down at between A$1.20 and A$4.00, bringing
it's commitment to over S$500 million. That investment is now essentially
worthless although Temasek has yet to write it down.

The company also bought 19% of LSE- listed Standard Chartered in 2006
only to see the market value of that stake melt 55% by November 21st.

More fiascos include a 975 million pound stake in Barclays Bank bought
at
the peak of 740 pence(with a further 100 million to subscribe for a
rights
issue at 282 pence), which have now sunk over 70% at 138 pence.

Most heinous of all is its US$6.88 billion stake in Citigroup bought
with a
minimum conversion price of $31.34. Citigroup has since plunged 88% to
$3.71, singlehandedly delivering S$9.11 billion of red ink to Temasek's (?GIC's)
books.
Overall, the paper loss on these bank investments appear to have exceeded S$35
billion
as of October 21st.

the millions from the TOWN COUNCILS are closer:p

 

[miosux]

Just because you think you may be screwed doesn't mean the PAP is screwing the people. The policies (high cost of housing - high resale prices benefit the 95% who ALREADY HAVE flats) low taxes (relatively despite all your claims) etc all benefit the majority of the centre, and in case you haven't noticed, it is the centre, not the extremely rich or extremely poor who make or break the government.

whether i'm being screwed over or not is irrelevant, making this personal is uncalled for...but not unexpected from your kind. but for the sake of argument, the high resale price does benefit existing home owners. but these guys are going to have kids one day, and their kids will be faced with million dollar HDBs in 20-30 years time when they're due to purchase a home. short sighted policy to keep themselves in power. are you still wondering why the people are not reproducing in numbers??

Low income tax, but add in all the various fees collected by all the different stat bods, GST, COE, ERP, high utility rates, petrol/diesel tax, this licence, that licence, what does ah seng the technician actually pay out? i'm not privy to these exact figures, but anecdotal evidence would suggest ah seng is feeling the pinch. your claim is as good or bad as mine.

while the extremely poor can't do shit to the gov, and the centre will be easily placated by free handouts, the extremely rich, or elites if u prefer, can break the economy and hence break the gov. don't obfuscate matters.

 

[cass888]

Didn't intend to make it personal. By "you" I meant a general "you", but there is no correct word for that. Alright, "you all".

When a majority of the people are queueing for cheap homes or have kids who are queueing for cheap homes, that will be the time to reconsider the policy. A policy which benefits the majority at the present

It is when the housing prices drop and the centre loses the ability to cash out in upgrading or downgrading that the government risks losing their votes and thus the government.

If you have lived in the US (or worse still, Canada) you will know that the total tax (after you include the COE. road tax, GST etc) is still very much lower in Singapore. At least in NY and ON where I lived in.

The rich in Singpaore will never mess with the government because while the centre are being taken care of, the rich are generally left alone. For argument's sake, check out how much $30,000 annual salary had to pay in taxes in 1980 - nearly $3,000.00. Now they pay $350. The $2,650 is enough to pay for the GST (even if they spend 100%) with money left over. Increase the annual salary to $40,000 and it becomes a no-brainer.

It is the people (the middle class allegedly speaking for the poor) demanding Robbing Hood policies that are out of touch. Such policies are lilkely to lose elections.

whether i'm being screwed over or not is irrelevant, making this personal is uncalled for...but not unexpected from your kind. but for the sake of argument, the high resale price does benefit existing home owners. but these guys are going to have kids one day, and their kids will be faced with million dollar HDBs in 20-30 years time when they're due to purchase a home. short sighted policy to keep themselves in power. are you still wondering why the people are not reproducing in numbers??

Low income tax, but add in all the various fees collected by all the different stat bods, GST, COE, ERP, high utility rates, petrol/diesel tax, this licence, that licence, what does ah seng the technician actually pay out? i'm not privy to these exact figures, but anecdotal evidence would suggest ah seng is feeling the pinch. your claim is as good or bad as mine.

while the extremely poor can't do shit to the gov, and the centre will be easily placated by free handouts, the extremely rich, or elites if u prefer, can break the economy and hence break the gov. don't obfuscate matters.

 

[Porfirio Rubirosa]

You sure love to be disingenuous

u didnt talk about fail safe.. but said that they messed up by losing $ (same shit diff wordings).

Past performance only goes so far, particularly since Temasek and GIC appear to lack proper adequate transparency and accountability. People like Dr Goh Keng Swee and the late Hon earned their spurs. Ho Ching on the otherhand has NOT, not by a very long shot and the perceived conflict of interest(at the very least) does not help either . As for that father-in law of her's, he appears to have long since used up his "past performance" credits. Only misguided foreigners, PAP stooges and sycophants and PAP diehard twits appear to believe in his speil nowadays.

temasek in its total history have made billions but u choose only to show their losses in a time of economic woes. that's called... taking a cheap shot..

Again you are being disingenuous, twisting and distorting what I say
The day this PAP government pegged top public servants pay to the top private sector wage was perhaps the start of the slippery slope.

Since when is $500k plus p/a a "humble income"? Well for you and your ilk a "peanut" or even less than a "peanut" I guess, sheesh. Let's get it straight here, you desire a huge obscene income, fine by all means but don't do it on public coffeers, go create your own wealth by your own means.

People of the calibre of Alan Greenspan and before him Paul Volcker appear to get by on US$200k plus p/a probably holding down one of the most important positions in the world. This says alot about benchmarking public sector pay to private sector pay. PAP's principles appear warped and based on self-interest and greed in this regard.

Btw I wonder who is having the last laugh now and sleeping soundly and blissfully at night, Ho Ching, LKY, Tony Tan, Ng Kok Song; or the managing directors of the Norwegian SWF?

so pap should learn from a man who is only interested in a humble income? i assume you share that same principle of cheap labor. that speaks volume of your iq..

Ditto above. Public sector and Private Sector are totally different kettles of fish. Moreover in Singapore's case it is made even worse because of the perceived lack of transparency and accountability (at the very least).

Want to be like George Soros, John Paulson, Philip Falcone, Kenneth Griffin and James Simons fine and dandy but do it in the private sector on your own steam. Please leave Public monies and public coffers alone tkq very much

btw, if one is making tons of $ for an organization and willingly accepts a relatively small pay, i'd get really worried.

 

[Porfirio Rubirosa]

Let's have some proper adequate independent transparency and accountability FIRST before even considering "you win some here, lose some elsewhere" ok

The $2 billion, you win some here, you lose some elsewhere. No big deal. At least we keep the money as assets (rise or fall) rather than play Robbing Hood.

 

[Porfirio Rubirosa]

Perhaps, but why should there be "balance" since PAP do not provide proper adequate transparency and accountability in the first place?

You want a "no spin zone" can, but you need to come with full proper disclosure, transparency and accountability first.

his thread is not without substance but without balance... purely out to undermine.

dont believe what i say. google for the facts.

 

[miosux]

just to quickly interrupt, the pegging of wages to the public sector is an act of them reaping the seeds of pragmatism they have sown. only money talks in this society they have nurtured.

the day they pegged it is the day they realized they've dug a hole they can't climb out of. this overwhelming sense of pragmatism in sg will only escalate further and further out of control.

Again you are being disingenuous, twisting and distorting what I say
The day this PAP government pegged top public servants pay to the top private sector wage was perhaps the start of the slippery slope.

 

[Porfirio Rubirosa]

Why should the "rich" ever want to mess with PAPs since PAPs appear pro rich? At the other end, the poor appear to being taken care of by the PAPs to some extent, perhaps to hold the social glue together. It is in the middle where the sandwich now appears to be squeezed. The growing income gap divide and inexorable rise in the cost of living appears to be crunching this group.

The rich in Singpaore will never mess with the government because while the centre are being taken care of, the rich are generally left alone. .

 

[sleaguepunter]

Just because you think you may be screwed doesn't mean the PAP is screwing the people. The policies (high cost of housing - high resale prices benefit the 95% who ALREADY HAVE flats) low taxes (relatively despite all your claims) etc all benefit the majority of the centre, and in case you haven't noticed, it is the centre, not the extremely rich or extremely poor who make or break the government.

Sorry, my math no good but i fail to see the logic high resale price benefit me in any way. I brought my resale flat at $240k in 2004 and still own around $50k for another 9 years of instalments to go. Let say i sell it at $300k, it not a profit of $60k as there interest on the loan that i had taken and also interest on the CPF that i had use to pay on the flat. So in the end, all i make was just maybe $10k-15k if i am lucky. Then where can i stay? i would had to buy another flat at $380k and go through the same circle again. So where benefit that you were talking about?

 

[Porfirio Rubirosa]

The big "benefit" was in the past for those who bought direct from HDB twice in the 70s and 80s. This group of Singgies made a tidy pile of $$$ and are no doubt happy with the PAPs for asset appreciation or inflation. From the late 90s onwards everything went down hill and it is probably going to get worse for the next generations on the property ladder with no big pocket parents to help.

Sorry, my math no good but i fail to see the logic high resale price benefit me in any way. I brought my resale flat at $240k in 2004 and still own around $50k for another 9 years of instalments to go. Let say i sell it at $300k, it not a profit of $60k as there interest on the loan that i had taken and also interest on the CPF that i had use to pay on the flat. So in the end, all i make was just maybe $10k-15k if i am lucky. Then where can i stay? i would had to buy another flat at $380k and go through the same circle again. So where benefit that you were talking about?

 

[cass888]

Why should the "rich" ever want to mess with PAPs since PAPs appear pro rich? At the other end, the poor appear to being taken care of by the PAPs to some extent, perhaps to hold the social glue together. It is in the middle where the sandwich now appears to be squeezed. The growing income gap divide and inexorable rise in the cost of living appears to be crunching this group.

Actually you're wrong. I would be the first to admit the poor get very muich less here than they would elsewhere.

If you really took the trouble to see how much 1st world countries milk the middle class, you wouldn't really think they are being that badlysandwiched. Elsewhere the middle class pay most the taxes because the poor earn nothing and the rich pay tax attorneys a bomb to avoid taxes like hell.

 

[Porfirio Rubirosa]

Big difference is that the "middle class" in the other 1st world nations get some form of permanent social security (some more than others) which does not exist in Singapore.

Actually you're wrong. I would be the first to admit the poor get very muich less here than they would elsewhere.

If you really took the trouble to see how much 1st world countries milk the middle class, you wouldn't really think they are being that badlysandwiched. Elsewhere the middle class pay most the taxes because the poor earn nothing and the rich pay tax attorneys a bomb to avoid taxes like hell.

 

[cass888]

Social security crap. You pay for other people's living hoping that people in future will pay for yours. When the population ages, you're screwed. Give me the eat-what-you-kill CPF system anyday. At least when you migrate or die, the money is all yours rather than feeding some panhandler.

Big difference is that the "middle class" in the other 1st world nations get some form of permanent social security (some more than others) which does not exist in Singapore.

 

[Porfirio Rubirosa]

That is besides the point and a different issue altogether.

Social security crap. You pay for other people's living hoping that people in future will pay for yours. When the population ages, you're screwed. Give me the eat-what-you-kill CPF system anyday. At least when you migrate or die, the money is all yours rather than feeding some panhandler.

 

[cass888]

That is besides the point and a different issue altogether.

You were the one who brought it up.

 

[TeeKee]

Can you imagine what all this money could have done for the NEEDY in SINGAPORE??
Temasek lost almost US$2 billion of a badly-timed US$3 billion in Shin
Corp
at a peak of 49.25 baht(Shin shares are now trading at around 15 baht)
in
2006.

This is unfortunately a curse set upon the Lee-Regime until they wake up their bloody idea..