CPF MediSave EduSave all ALL Grand Ponzi Schemes of PAP

[COW flu]

CPF MediSave EduSave are ALL Grand Ponzi Schemes of PAP

It is OPENLY accused that US's Medicure etc are the BIGGEST Grand Ponzi Schemes. Chinese called these 吸金大法。

PAP's CPF MediSave EduSave etc etc are JUST THE SAME. They sucked up you money in COMPULSORY Manner worst than all the rest, and had been protected by so called Laws. They squandered your money, and only depending solely on new members of CPF to contribute further so that they can pay out some to the old members. There is a great deficit what the PAP had lost heavily, and there is very little new members, and Singaporean population aged and declined. The CPF Ponzi is GOING BUST. The PAP's plan to had foreigner to come here to make population 6.5 million hoping to TOP-UP their CPF Ponzi is failing, because foreigners closed their CPF A/C and left Singapore.

There is no money left, even before Singaporeans get old. PAP want us to die in Johore & Batam. The CPF account balance statement is just a piece of worthless shit. Money is long gone thanks to PAP Ponzi Crooks.



Chinese national news agency 新华网 http://www.news.cn had expressed it's view:

http://news.xinhuanet.com/world/2009-05/23/content_11421715.htm

您的位置：新华网主页 - 新华国际
美国医疗保险：最大的旁氏骗局？
2009年05月23日 07:19:30 　来源：新华网
【字号 大 中 小】　【留言】　【打印】　【关闭】

【Email推荐： 】

美国的医疗保险体系被称为“这个国家所做的最好的事情之一”。然而，随着金融危机的深化，它的缺陷日益显现。专家说，现行医疗保险体系是对年轻一代的掠夺，终有一天将不堪负荷，分崩离析。从这个意义上讲，它好比世界最大的旁氏骗局。

　　老人：看病是一种社交

在美国弗洛里达州棕榈滩的拉波萨达退休社区，人们过着令人羡慕的生活。那里有大理石铺成的地面，清澈的游泳池，美味的食堂，还有风景如画的湖边公寓。拉波萨达退休社区因此被福布斯评为美国十大“富丽宫”退休社区之一。

居民乔·特纳说：“我们在这里的生活比蜜甜。”

那么，入住这一社区要多少钱呢？

“约３５万到５０万美元之间，”另一居民山姆·巴思说。

这还只是入住的初始费用。来这里居住的老人都是成功人士，收入颇丰。除此之外，他们还享受优厚的医疗保险，绝大多数医疗费用都由纳税人替他们支付。

“医疗保险，我认为它是最美妙的东西，”居民玛丽莲·赫伦说。

另一位居民亨利·贝克同意这一说法，他说医疗保险是“这个国家所做的最好的事情之一”。

他们当然热爱医疗保险，谁不希望得到免费服务？正因为医疗保险的存在，他们看病几乎全部免费，即使有少许开支，也十分便宜，因此，他们中有些人三天两头跑医院。

“那是我们的社交生活，”赫伦开玩笑道。

　　年轻人：这是对我们的盗窃

但哈佛大学商学院教授雷吉娜·赫茨林格认为，医疗保险欺诈了年轻人。“我们给年轻人留下了怎样的遗产？”她说，“我们实际上是在盗窃，这是不对的。”

美国广播公司“２０/２０”节目组采访了俄亥俄州代顿３名高中生。他们非常热衷于帮助老人，是食物派发中心的志愿者，但他们都对医疗保险体系颇有微词，认为这一体系强迫他们为富有老人支付医疗费用。

学生帕蒂·阿诺德说：“他们住着３０万到５０万的豪宅，却不用自己支付医疗费用，他们在道义上是怎么想的？”

另一名学生扎克·加达维说：“医疗体系实际上是对我们这一代的抢劫。”

美国企业研究所政策制定专家安德鲁·比格斯认为，学生的抱怨不无道理。他说：“政府对老人和孩子的花费比例是６：１，而实际上，孩子中的贫穷率远远高于老人的贫穷率。”

正如学生内森·康斯特布尔所言，这就好比“从需要帮助的人手中夺取钱财帮助那些不需要帮助的人”。

对于年轻人的抱怨，拉波萨达社区的居民作何反应？大多数老人认为，这么多年来，他们每月的工资收入都要被扣除一笔钱用于养老，现在享有的一切，他们早就预付了。

居民亨利·珀尔说：“我为它支付了４０年。我们现在的生活是应得的。”

危机：酝酿财政海啸

的确，老人为医疗保险支付多年，但如今的医疗保险受益人所得到的是他们当初付出的两到三倍。

已退休的亿万富翁皮特·彼得森说，医疗保险体系“不仅不公平，而且是彻头彻尾的不道德”。

彼得森认为，医疗保险体系不仅关乎公平，也关乎支付能力。他名下的慈善基金会警告说，如不采取措施推动政府财政改革，医疗保险体系行将倒闭。

“医疗保险体系正在酝酿一场财政海啸，”彼得森说。

美国政府１９６５年创建医疗保险体系，那时，每６个处于就业年龄段的美国人支付一名医疗保险受益人；如今，由于人们寿命延长、老人大幅增多，约４名处于就业年龄段的美国人就要支付一名医疗保险受益人。随着婴儿潮一代进入退休阶段，这一情况只会更加糟糕。

政府承诺在目前基础上，对医疗保险再追加３４万亿美元投入，这相当于发动３０场伊拉克战争。在今天的青少年步入退休年龄之前，现行医疗保险体系注定分崩离析。从这一意义上讲，当前的医疗保险体系好比世界最大的旁氏骗局。

“医疗保险体系不可能担保我们这一代有任何回报，”康斯特布尔说。

但拉波萨达的居民认为，现行医疗保险体系应当承担更多费用，尽管它已经支付了一些并非必要的内容，比如伟哥。

这听起来令人震惊，但老人需要这些。事实上，他们需要什么，往往就能得到什么，因为他们手中有选票，而且数目巨大。所以，如果一个政治家试图在竞选中宣扬削减医疗保险开支，老人们会说：“好吧，你自己支付竞选费用吧，别指望从我这里得到什么。”

　　改变：并非一蹴而就

赫茨林格和彼得森认为，老人应当做出一定牺牲：医疗保险必须提高适用人年龄，或者减少对富裕老人的免费服务。

“我们需要在医疗保险体系中增加个人义务，”赫茨林格说，“如果你没钱，好，你可以享受医疗保险；如果你能支付医疗保险，那么，请你自行支付。”

美国退休协会反对这一提议。它认为，医疗保险赤字可以通过消除浪费和改革医疗服务来解决。退休协会立法政策负责人大卫·塞尔特内尔说：“我们要做的事情是更好地利用医疗信息技术和医疗记录。”

那么，计算机能解决所有问题？“当然，它们不能解决所有问题，但能有助于医疗体系更加有效，”塞尔特内尔说。

但国会预算办公室说，塞尔特内尔所倡导的改革并不能节省多少钱，不会带来实际不同，但塞尔特内尔坚持己见。

过去１０年里，美国退休协会为游说政府实施它设想的医疗改革共花费１.５亿美元。它还打广告提醒立法者：我们在盯着你们。

“美国退休协会不希望看到人们失去医疗保险，”塞尔特内尔说。

但彼得森坚持认为，最终将有人放弃部分医疗保险内容。他一直在进行一场孤独的战争，因为很多老年人并不知道现行医疗保险体系的弊端。

令人高兴的是，当“２０/２０”节目组向拉波萨达的居民介绍了现行医疗保险体系的困境后，一部分人表达了他们新的想法。

“我听过年轻人的说法，严格从货币角度来讲，他们说的没错，”珀尔说，“当他们到我们这把年纪，可能就没有医疗保险了。”

他们理解医疗保险体系面临的财政危机，并不真想掠夺年轻一代的财富。“让他们去改变法律吧，当他们有了选举权，就可以实现，”拉波萨达居民麦卡锡说。

当然，这不会一蹴而就。（唐昀）

　　相关链接：美民企将参与削减医疗开支努力

　　美国媒体５月１０日报道，６家美国主要医疗和保险组织准备与总统贝拉克·奥巴马递交一封信，表示愿意帮助政府，从明年开始的１０年内，把美国医疗开支增长速度每年降低１．５个百分点，总共节省约２万亿美元。按此幅度，到计划实施第五年时，一个４口之家一年可以省下平均２５００美元医疗费。

美国政府去年公布的统计数据显示，美国家庭２００７年平均年收入约为５万美元。

美国的医疗开支为全球之最。根据政府统计，美国２００７年医疗支出为２．２万亿美元，比上一年增长６．１％。这一数字占国内生产总值的１６．２％，相当于平均每人支出７４２１美元。

政府预计，从２００８年到２０１８年，医疗开支平均每年将增长６．２％。按此速度，到２０１８年，美国医疗支出将占经济总量的五分之一。

美国虽然医疗支出庞大，但长期存在效率和公平问题。３亿多美国人中约４６００万人没有医疗保险。

《纽约时报》报道，上述６家医疗和保险组织表示，削减开支途径包括采取积极措施向肥胖开战、协同医疗、控制慢性病、减少不必要的检查和手续、制订标准化保险索赔单据和增加信息化技术的应用，如建立电子医疗记录。

报道认为，民间企业和机构的努力只能部分解决医疗支出上涨问题，大部分支出减少还需要改革现行法规来实现。


http://query.nytimes.com/search/sit...urance+ponzi&submit.x=0&submit.y=0&submit=sub

 

[myfoot123]

Medisave is confirmed a ponzi scheme. We cannot withdraw the money and medical fee from there is peace-meal. The bulk will go to the govt hands, confirmed a scam. CPF, once annuity is pushed through, confirmed a nightmare for Singaporean, you will never get to see those savings of yours because annuity is a third key to lock your money forever. Only alternative govt can unlock it for us and Tan Kin Lian become our president.

 

[McDollar]

This is the wiki and history of Charles Ponzi:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ponzi_scheme

1910 police photo:

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/zRTPKcJGwe4&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/zRTPKcJGwe4&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

Older Charles Ponzi:

http://money.howstuffworks.com/ponzi-scheme.htm


How Ponzi Schemes Work

by Jane McGrath

* Print
* Email
* Cite
* Feedback
*
Share
o Digg This
o Yahoo! Buzz
o StumbleUpon
o TwitThis
o Reddit
* Share on Facebook

Cite This!
Close
Please copy/paste the following text to properly cite this HowStuffWorks article:

McGrath, Jane. "How Ponzi Schemes Work." 09 February 2009. HowStuffWorks.com. <http://money.howstuffworks.com/ponzi-scheme.htm> 22 May 2009.
Inside this Article

1. Introduction to How Ponzi Schemes Work
2. Charles Ponzi's Scheme
3. Ponzi Scheme Basics

4. Ponzi Schemes vs. Pyramid Schemes
5. Other Notable Ponzi Schemes
6. Bernard Madoff's Ponzi Scheme
7.
See more »
7. How to Smell a Ponzi Scheme
8. Lots More Information
9. See all Scams articles

Money Videos
Money Videos

* More Money Videos »

Image Gallery: Types of Money Scams

_charles ponzi
Associated Press
An older Charles Ponzi reflects on his infamous, though brief, stint as a successful schemer. See more money scam pictures.
_

For some reason, this guy you just met at a party has suddenly taken a liking to you. To him, you seem sharp and able to recognize a goldmine when you see it. He only offers this tip to his closest friends, but he's willing to make an exception for you. He says if you get in on this opportunity now, you'll be an early investor in the next big thing. Not only that, it's fail-safe and will return your investment in no time. If you're skeptical, why not ask your friends at the party -- they invested last month and have already seen returns. You do ask them, and it's true. So why not hand over a few thousands of dollars before it's too late? Despite what your trustworthy friends say, it's better to walk away. This guy is probably selling a Ponzi scheme.

Unfortunately, not all financial schemes look the same, which makes it hard to spot one when you're victimized. In true Darwinian style, clever scammers are able to thrive by consistently adapting and evolving their schemes to come up with new ways to con others out of their life savings. The Ponzi scheme is just one type of con. And, although it's based on a classic formula, the idea can be applied in countless ways to deceive unsuspecting victims.
Next Up

* How Fraud Prevention Works
* Identity Theft Quiz
* InvestigationDiscovery.com: 10 Corrupt CEOs

_

_Ponzi schemes pop up frequently, though not all of them are big enough to make headlines. But every few years, a news story comes out telling how authorities have exposed an extensive and long-running Ponzi scheme. Two such exposed schemes (one that broke in 2006 and the other in 2008) were each reportedly bigger than any before them. Bernard Madoff, who, if allegations are true, orchestrated the most massive Ponzi scheme to date, conned about $50 billion from investors who came from all walks of life.

Why is the scheme so effective? And how is it that your victimized friends in the earlier example actually did make some money? We'll examine the formula behind a Ponzi scheme as well as the recent instances that have popped up in the news. But first, let's take a look at Charles Ponzi, the notorious schemer whose name became so synonymous with the scam that it now bears his name.
Next Page

 

[McDollar]

http://money.howstuffworks.com/ponzi-scheme2.htm

Ponzi Scheme Basics
house of cards scheme
_©_istockphoto/bluestocking
People often compare a Ponzi scheme to building a house of cards. It must collapse eventually.

Though it landed him in jail, Charles Ponzi's infamous scam spawned many imitators. The get-rich-quick scheme has proved too alluring for other scoundrels to pass up. However, these imitators need not use the front of international reply coupons to make it work.

The basic framework of a Ponzi scheme can be applied and reapplied in countless contexts. The scheme revolves around the process of paying old investors with the money you get from new investors. The central method remains the same. All one has to do is hook a few investors who are willing to get in early on a once-in-a-lifetime business venture. The details of the investment don't matter too much. What suckers people in is the promise of fantastic returns on investments.

After the schemer has convinced a handful of investors to fork over money, those funds can bankroll a nice car -- or, if the schemer is truly sneaky, he or she can use it to rent office space and buy some fancy furniture. These props will help con the next round of investors. Now, he or she is ready to find more investors. This time, the schemer takes a slice off the top for himself or herself and uses the rest to pay off the first rung of investors with some initial returns. (Some liken this to robbing Peter to pay Paul, but it's not quite the same, as we'll see.)

Eventually, the second rung of investors will need its payout. This is a simple matter of wash, rinse and repeat: The money from a newly recruited third rung of investors can pay off the second rung and deliver more returns to the first rung.

But as the cycle goes on, it gets more complicated. Earlier rungs of investors will get suspicious if they don't continue to see returns. New investors will have to be paid back their initial investment, and the schemer will have to appease them with regular returns. This means that new investors will have to be added to the Ponzi scheme continuously in order to pay all the previous rungs. The schemer is under an enormous amount of pressure to keep adding investors, and one person can only do so much. (This is why the most successful schemes typically involve accomplices, but this merely delays the inevitable.) The scheme will eventually become unsustainable. The upside-down house of cards the schemer has built will finally collapse.

 

[McDollar]

http://money.howstuffworks.com/ponzi-scheme3.htm


Ponzi Schemes vs. Pyramid Schemes
Lucky Victims
Some victims make out pretty well in a Ponzi scheme. Although later investors certainly lose money, the early investors can come out ahead. Their testimonials are exactly what help perpetuate the scheme. Some unscrupulous characters invest with the full knowledge that they're funding a Ponzi scheme -- they cross their fingers that they aren't in the bottom rung. Of course, any money they make is at the expense of other investors. Legal questions abound as to whether these lucky initial investors should be forced to help recoup losses for later investors [source: Berenson].
_

_Many people associate Ponzi schemes with pyramid schemes. While they do share some similarities, they're not exactly the same. If you think about the organization and methodology behind a Ponzi scheme, it certainly has a triangular structure. The schemer sits at the top, above continually increasing rungs of investors. However, there are fundamental differences between how classic pyramid schemes are carried out and how Ponzi schemes are executed.

The essential difference between a pyramid scheme and a Ponzi scheme is that a Ponzi schemer will only ask you to invest in something. You won't be asked to take any more action than handing over money. He or she will claim to take care of the rest and give you your returns later. The Ponzi schemer is the mastermind behind the whole system and is always shuffling money from one place to another.

On the other hand, a pyramid schemer will offer you an opportunity to make the money yourself. It requires more work, though: You have to buy the right to start a franchise and start recruiting more people like yourself. The recruits will often pay the recruiter a cut of their profits. You can read How Pyramid Schemes Work to understand more about that process.

The difference may seem slight, but one point to keep in mind is that unlike pyramid schemes, Ponzi schemes are always illegal [source: Walsh]. Some legitimate businesses, such as Mary Kay and The Pampered Chef, have been built around the pyramid idea. But the nature of a Ponzi scheme necessarily relies on securities fraud. It involves deceit to convince someone to invest money that won't actually be invested.

Nevertheless, some people continue to use the terms interchangeably, and many texts classify Ponzi schemes as a type of pyramid scheme. And, of course, when you're the victim of one, the difference probably seems insignificant.

Next, we'll take a look at some other real-life Ponzi schemers.

 

[McDollar]

http://money.howstuffworks.com/ponzi-scheme4.htm


Other Notable Ponzi Schemes

As we mentioned earlier, Charles Ponzi didn't invent the scheme himself. Ponzi's biographer, Mitchell Zuckoff, writes of his predecessors, Sarah Howe and William Franklin Miller. In 1880s Boston, Sarah Howe offered female investors a chance to make money in the Ladies Deposit. She garnered half a million dollars from more than a thousand women, using some of the funds to pay off other investors and pocketing the rest. A couple of decades later, William Franklin Miller came along and tried the scheme again to even bigger success. He promised unheard-of returns, and when he came through on his promises, more investors poured in, handing over a million dollars in total before he was exposed [source: Zuckoff]. In Miller's case, the victims were so thrilled by the success of their investments that they chose to reinvest their earnings in his scheme [source: Zuckoff].

Clearly, Ponzi wasn't the first to implement the scheme, and he wasn't the last -- not by a long shot. Since his stunt in 1920, many Ponzi schemes have been exposed around the world. Some in the past few decades have been the most damaging, however. In Albania in 1996 and '97, several schemes using the Ponzi method swindled a total of $2 billion from the public (the amount equaled about 30 percent of the country's gross domestic product) [source: Shiller]. Once the scheme was exposed, riots broke out, causing several deaths.

Until late 2008, the reigning champion of Ponzi schemers was Lou Pearlman. Remember the boy band craze that started the late 1990s? The bands Backstreet Boys and 'N Sync were two of the most popular musical groups of the period, and each was created and financially backed by Pearlman. By 2006, authorities found out that he'd been orchestrating an enormous, long-running Ponzi scheme, which helped him initially fund the bands. For a good 20 years, he had convinced others to invest in nonexistent companies for which he claimed to have FDIC and AIG insurance.

Pearlman received a jail sentence of 25 years for conning $300 million from investors. For every million he paid back, a month was cut off of his sentence [source: Sisario]. If you think that's a lot of money, brace yourself for Bernie Madoff.

 

[McDollar]

http://money.howstuffworks.com/ponzi-scheme5.htm

Bernard Madoff's Ponzi Scheme
Bernie Madoff
Jason DeCrow/Associated Press
Bernie Madoff pulled off a wildly successful Ponzi scheme before things started to unravel and he fessed up in 2008.
__

In December 2008, Bernard Madoff revealed that his firm, Bernard L. Madoff Investment Securities, was "just one big lie" [source: Henriques]. In what he described as a Ponzi scheme, it's estimated he took his investors for a cool $50 billion. And he didn't just con fat-cat billionaires and celebrities (such as Zsa Zsa Gabor, Kevin Bacon and Steven Spielberg); humbler individual investors, banks and even charities lost money in the scheme [source: WSJ, Sunday Times].

One reason that Madoff was so successful was that he was a highly respected, well-established and esteemed financial expert -- his reputation was bolstered by the fact that he helped found NASDAQ. What's more, at the same time he was running his scheme, he was also running a legitimate business [source: Appelbaum]. He earned his investors' trust because whenever they requested a withdrawal, Madoff's investment company got it to them promptly. In addition, unlike other Ponzi schemers, he didn't tempt investors with unbelievable returns. He reported moderate (albeit, suspiciously consistent) returns to his investors.

Despite these protective covers, many critics have begun to question the Securities and Exchange Commission's (SEC) actions -- or lack thereof -- regarding the Madoff case. According to reports, the SEC received multiple complaints about Madoff beginning in 1999. It's not unusual for tip-offs such as these to help authorities build a case and eventually expose a Ponzi scheme [source: Scannell]. However, the SEC failed to come up with any smoking gun, which might've been as straightforward as making Madoff prove his holdings [source: Appelbaum]. According to some sources, any examinations the SEC conducted fell drastically short [source: Moyer]. Critics point to the embarrassing fact that it wasn't until Madoff felt the scheme crumbling and confessed that the authorities stepped in.

That Madoff was able to carry on uninvestigated for so long is testament to many that the regulatory system is flawed. For instance, once Madoff did confess, he said that he worked alone. Obviously, suspicions quickly rose about whether Madoff could've acted alone to pull off what has been revealed as the biggest Ponzi scheme in history. Once he felt that his scheme was beginning to collapse, Madoff had plenty of time to destroy evidence to cover up for others. Some could argue that any negligence on the part of the SEC could have jeopardized attempts to find his accomplices.

So if Ponzi schemes still abound, you should know what to look out for.


CPF is losing Singaporeans & Malaysian CPF members trust because we all CAN NOT GET OUR MONEY BACK from CPF.

 

[Mohd_Ah_LEE]

indeed!

Pap grand ponzi!

 

[Einfield]

indeed!

Pap grand ponzi!

First, There's no way to proof it.
By time you proof it, it's too late.

Let's go back to basics, How the hell, we allow a person, no matter how smart he is, who is a known traitor, to run our country?

 

[Loong_Bush]

First, There's no way to proof it.
By time you proof it, it's too late.

Let's go back to basics, How the hell, we allow a person, no matter how smart he is, who is a known traitor, to run our country?

By the way it operates and the fact that our parents couldn't get their CPF at their age over 55 is already proven that CPF is a grand ponzi scam. What else do you need? Kept limiting the withdrawal and kept forcing us to pay into CPF, age limit is changed and changed, make us work like slaves till over age of 70. That is MUCH WORST THAN MADOFF's Ponzi!

:oIo::oIo::oIo: FUCK PAP :oIo::oIo::oIo: