Meeting at Speaker's Corner 18 Oct, 6-7 pm

[Ah Hai]

Survey - J. B. Jeyaretnam

Friday, January 02, 2009
Survey - J. B. Jeyaretnam
Summary of 29 responses.

1. What was your opionion of Mr. J. B. Jeyaretnam in the past years?
I respected him 75.9%
Neutral 17.2%
I had a negative opinion of him 6.9%

2. Where was your main source of information about Mr. Jeyaretnam?
I heard him speak 37.9%
I read his book or publication 13.8%
I read reports from the newspapers 48.3%

3. Do you have a different opinion of him recently?
I have a more favourable impression 62.1%
My impressin remains the same 34.5%
I have a less favourable impression 3.4%

4. Did Mr. Jeyaretnam made a positive contribution to Singapore during his lifetime?
Yes 96.6%
No 0.0%
No opinion 3.4%

5. Do you wish to make any personal statement?

> Not only about Mr Jeyaretnam but of the Straits Times which I see now to be a biased newspaper not interested in justice but its own interests. JB Jeyaretnam is a giant among men and is a true Singaporean who selfless gestures brought him and his family much anguish. However, it is not totally in vain as it will make many Singaporeans realise how small they are in comparison with him. For the Straits Times, it is a shame that a national newspaper in a first world country can be so biased and one sided. It reflects poorly and negates the good deeds done by your esteemed bosses. Shame, shame, shame.

> I respected him for his courage and determination in fighting for what he believed in, while the whole machinery was totally working against him.

> A man full of courage, a warrior, a good man

> If S'pore has 5% this type of quality person (dare speak dare do) the Pupy will extinct instantly, but most chinese are kiasi...exercise your vote, please

> His greatest achievement was to break the one party system in Singapore.

> He was 1 of the few politicians in Singapore deserving of respect.

> JBJ is someone who cares about injustices and the suffering of the lower income group. I wish more lawyers are like him.

> No doubt, a selfless patriot who love this country and sacrificed very much for all Singaporean. He paid the price for his belief where no Singaporean dare!

> Mr. Jeyaretnam lives in the hearts of true Singaporeans forever.

> A true and daring opposition leader. never say die attitude and are able to take on the government headon without fleeing.

> I have the outmost respect for him, even while reading about him thru main media. However upon reading outside of mainstream controlled media, my view relative to several key people has changed.

> A great and humble man

> He is a man who we should respect for his dedication & courage to the causes that he believe in.

> We need more people like Jeyaratnam in parliament. That will help to improve the socio-economic lifestyle in S'pore.

> He was a good man. A prominent son of Singapore as well.
Posted by Tan Kin Lian at 6:05 AM
1 comments:

Anonymous said...

less we get carried away, i think Singaporeans are generally sympathetic towards him.

 

[Ah Hai]

Reply to Ho Yew Kee

Friday, January 02, 2009
Reply to Ho Yew Kee
Sent to Straits Times on 13 December 2008, but not publised.

Editor
Forum Page
Straits Times

I refer to the letter by Mr. Ho Yew Kee entitled “A mistake to overreact” (ST, 13 Dec 2008).

Mr. Ho said, “It would be imprudent for the stewards of town council funds to play it safe and place their reserves in fixed deposits or government bonds, as the returns would not even offset the inflation rate.” He also said, “Corporate bonds provided a yield of 4 to 6 percent, but the corporate have different credit ratings”.

In my view, it would be prudent for the town councils to invest in corporate bonds, provided that the investments are spread over several corporate bonds to reduce the impact of the failure of some of these bonds.

In fact, over 10,000 people were sold the credit linked notes. They were misled into believing that they were investing in a basket of 5 to 8 of the entities, which were financially strong companies or sovereign governments.

They were told that if one entity should fail, they would only lose their invested sum on a proportionate basis. If 1 of 8 entities failed, their loss would be 12.5%.

They were shocked to learn later that they were actually selling credit insurance against the failure of any of these entities. If any single entity failed, their entire principal would be lost. Instead of spreading the risk proportionately over 8 entities, they were taking 8 times of the risk of any single bond!

In addition, their principal was actually invested in a portfolio of 100 to 150 underlying securities, which could comprise of collateralised debt obligations of lower rating. This has additional risk to the investors.

The combined risk of failure of “toxic” credit-linked notes is very high. This explains why many of these notes have failed totally, compared to bond funds.

The stewards of the town councils, who have access to professional advisers, should explain if they were aware about the nature of the credit-linked notes and if the return of 5% is insufficient to match the risk. If the town councils were also misled about the nature of these products, it is their fiduciary duty to take appropriate action to recover their loss.

Several local government bodies in the UK were also misled into investing in similar high-risk products. They took legal action and were able to obtain a court decision to rescind the contracts. I urge our town councils in Singapore to do the same.

Tan Kin Lian
Posted by Tan Kin Lian at 8:00 AM

 

[Ah Hai]

20 comments:

Chan J C said...

Dear Mr. Tan

Thanks for sharing.

You mentioned that

"... Several local government bodies in the UK were also misled into investing in similar high-risk products. They took legal action and were able to obtain a court decision to rescind the contracts..."

Could you kindly post such cases for our reference?

Thank you sir.
JC
December 15, 2008 3:15 PM
Wayangnologist said...

"Sent to Straits Times on 13 December 2008, but not publised."


There, THATS the response.
December 15, 2008 3:28 PM
Anonymous said...

Mr Tan,

I can understand why ST didn't publish it.

Because you describe the issues so clearly and simply and it hurts the other side because they cannot rebut it.

That's why it is good to turn to alternative media like the blogs and internet.

I hope the gahmen linked ST should be aware that this is not the past, but the internet age. Their policy on this is behaving like an ostrich.
December 15, 2008 3:33 PM
Anonymous said...

The 2% or any return rate published by the town council, does it factor in inflation?

If not, that could be a negative return rate and it is not worth keep the fund?
December 15, 2008 4:33 PM
Anonymous said...

Did they have the knowledge to keep and grow the fund ?
Were they misled into buying the products ?

They are in a Catch 22 position, but they are still not giving the public and residents a good answer !

It is so easy, answer A or B !
A) They are not competent enough.
B) They are also victims in the saga.
Sorry no choice "C".

We are still waiting for the truth.

Hope the MPs will follow up the issue.
December 15, 2008 5:49 PM
vertigoer said...

The thing is why does Town council have to horde our money?

http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/singaporelocalnews/view/390407/1/.html

S$4 million is 2.6 percent of Pasir Ris-Punggol.

That means they have a fund of S$153 million.

Do we need to spend S$153 million in a year for simple services?
http://www.prpg-tc.org.sg/cms/services.php

http://www.punggol.sg/forum/communi...hman_brothers-t18993.0.html;msg64195#msg64195

From here, 80,000 household. means, TC is holding around $1912 of my money!

If not why, do they need to keep collecting so much of our cash?
December 15, 2008 6:16 PM
BondGone said...

Just like the Town councils who thought they are buying a bucket of Corporate Bonds, we bought these MiniBond, High Notes and Pinnacle Notes because they sold them using the big name Corporations with AA+ ratings as "Bait" but they do not operate like Corporate Bond at all. If this is like corporate Bond that pays 5% interest, I am suppose to have the other Bonds in my Bucket even with one or two collapsed.
December 15, 2008 9:01 PM
Anonymous said...

The Straits Times is controlling information to the masses. This is dangerous as it is manipulating information to its ends. This has no place in a democratic society.
December 15, 2008 9:44 PM
Anonymous said...

Maybe the best approach is a super huge class action, unprecedented in the Singapore history of consumer protection. The key defendants shall include everyone who had a hand in perpetrating this debacle, from the sales people to the distributors and product originators.
The CEOs and senior managements of bankrupted corporations must be investigated and the guilty ones charged and punished for their sins.
After all, the long arm of the law is indeed long and unyielding, if only the governments have the resolve and spirit of co-operation in combating these frauds.

By RTA
December 15, 2008 10:22 PM
Anonymous said...

Mr. Tan

ST may have lost your mail.

Just try to send to them again and CC to MND. Mr. Mah will know what to do.

If ST really refuse to publish, you got no choice, but to seek help from TOC to put at their headline, more and more people are reading TOC now.
December 15, 2008 10:22 PM
Anonymous said...

Our Town Councils with deeper pockets, financial & legal advice at their disposal should in the first place initiate legal proceedings if they had been misled. Why are they so quiet?? Millions of dollars of tax-payers' monies are at stake!! Where is the transparency & accountability!!!
December 16, 2008 12:37 AM
Anonymous said...

Well honestly even if the town councils take legal action our courts will not rule in their favour as our courts are also gahmen linked and hence, the court will not rule against the gahmen.
December 16, 2008 9:30 PM
Jeremy said...

Banks are big advertisers for ST. I presume they do not want to risk alienating their big clients even if it means that they hold back information that is newsworthy.

It is difficult for any mass media that generates revenue from advertisers to be unbiased.
December 18, 2008 1:23 AM
Anonymous said...

Mr Tan

[A] Excellent reply. Grave regret for not being published by ST.

I have another concern.
- How can Town Council accumulates so much reserves in the first place.
- How come the reserves was not published to residents. I stay in an OLD CONDO and the accounts are presented regularly.

From CASHEW NUT
December 26, 2008 5:56 PM

 

[Ah Hai]

Re: 20 comments:

Ho Yew Kee said...

Dear All,

It was never my intention to side the government or town council for the losses but to provide a view that we should not be far too hard on the volunteers who had dedicated their time to serve in the TC.

Guess, there are two possible tests (where one is impossible to perform now):

a. What would we have done if we are to invest the reserves of the TC then? (Context: inflation runs at 4% to 6.5%). Hindsight is 20/20.

b. What do we do now with the reserve given the fact that fixed deposit rate is close to zero and there may be good opportunities for cherry picking but we may also lose our shirts? What would we do if we are to serve in the TC now in the context of this furore?

I assure you that it is never my intention to defend the TC but to ensure that people do not get discouraged that one mistake may have wiped out their entire life or years of good works as volunteers in TC. No wonder most trustees or volunteers would not even want to explore "higher" returns for reserves because such efforts have little "upside" (ie. people would not thank you for the service because this is what you are supposed to do, this is tax payer money, this is charity dollars etc.....) but plenty of downside (ie. "why did you not be more prudent and careful when you invest", "you should know better..."). Or in the words of a writer "Who is going to answer for the losses ? Without a system of accountability in place, how can residents be assured that a repeat mistake will not occur again?"

Servng in the TC becomes a catch22 situation. If you dont get higher yield, you are not doing your job. If you chased after higher yield investment, you bear higher risk and if you lose, money, you are not being careful or in the words of one writer that the volunteers are either incompetent or have been misled.

Barring the complexities of the instruments which resulted in the losses, we faced an epic episode in the history of finance, namely, the collapsed of some of the largest investment banks in the world. No one would have foreseen that.

I apologise if my letter caused you anguish or any misunderstanding in my intention.

Wishing you a happy new year.


Yew Kee
January 01, 2009 10:32 PM
vertigoer said...

Mr Ho, if TC don't have large reserve then there won't be a situation on a) and b) issue.

If TC was only holding $1 million dollars in reserve, I don't mind $12.50 (80,000 household) be left to option a).

Mr Ho, please comment on this.
January 02, 2009 6:39 AM
Tan Kin Lian said...

Dear Ho Yew Kee

Thank you for giving a reply in my blog.

I do not blame the Town Council for making the investment. Like the ordinary folks, they have been misled.

Having been misled, it is their duty to take legal action against the distributor (for not giving proper information on the product) and against their professional advisers.

The Town Council should not just let the matter passed.

I repeat the calls in the last two paragraphs of my letter:


The stewards of the town councils, who have access to professional advisers, should explain if they were aware about the nature of the credit-linked notes and if the return of 5% is insufficient to match the risk. If the town councils were also misled about the nature of these products, it is their fiduciary duty to take appropriate action to recover their loss.

Several local government bodies in the UK were also misled into investing in similar high-risk products. They took legal action and were able to obtain a court decision to rescind the contracts. I urge our town councils in Singapore to do the same.
January 02, 2009 8:37 AM
Anonymous said...

Ho Yew Kee has got everything wrong.

It is about Credit-linked Notes sold to 'Unsuitable' persons - the ordinary people.

It is about TC's investing in risky CLNs that both principal & invest payment will get wiped out! Do not simply cite inflation as an excuse, please be clear that it is the CLNs that TC decided that the people's money should take a gamble that matter!

Know what U talk and Talk what U know!
January 02, 2009 8:54 AM
Anonymous said...

Ho Yew Kee claims "never my intention to side the government or town council".
Yet he totally ignores the main points repeatedly mentioned by TKL.

Either
a) TC had been misled and ought to now take action against the distributor or advisors
Or
b) TC knowingly invest residents money into high risk product even though the return is not commensurate with the risk involved, they dont care because it is not their money.

By ignoring the main points, it is clear to everyone Ho Yew Kee is on which side of the camp.
January 02, 2009 9:06 AM
Anonymous said...

Dear Mr Ho Yew Kee,

In replying your questions:
a. What would we have done if we are to invest the reserves of the TC then?
b. What do we do now with the reserve given the fact that fixed deposit rate is close to zero ..?

MY ANSWER is clear that TC should NOT invest in structured notes type of products.

[1] RISKY PRODUCT: It is a very risky product. RISK is a function of market condition and structure. Structured Notes are sitting on UNSAFE structure.

[2] STEWARDSHIP: Principal protection is more important than return because being TC RESERVE means it is reserved for future use for the benefits of residents. Residents expect the TC committee to be STEWARDS and not FUND MANAGER. I think the role must be clear.

[3] UNDERSTAND THE PRODUCT: It is a complex product. I think the management committee of TC will have problem understand the product, and it would be even more difficult explaining it to residents.

You said: "Serving in the TC becomes a catch22 situation...?" I propose you look into the committee responsibility from a STEWARDSHIP perspective, instead of a FUND MANAGER perspective; then you will feel more comfortable to PROTECT CAPITAL even when the return is lower.

I hope to have cleared the confusion caused by your letter.

From CASHEW NUT
January 02, 2009 11:30 AM

 

[Ah Hai]

Re: Survey on Distribution Cost of Life Insurance Policy

Thursday, January 01, 2009
Survey on Distribution Cost of Life Insurance Policy

If you have bought a life insurance policy (i.e. whole, life, endowment, investment linked, or variation) during the past two years, you can participate in this survey:

http://www.surveymonkey.com/s.aspx?sm=AaicemJhQmUXu8DitwJm8Q_3d_3d
Posted by Tan Kin Lian at 10:30 PM

13 Comments

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hi Mr Tan,

Just wanted to know why buying Insurance policies must go thru' an agent (Assuming that the potential policyholder knows what he wants and does not need the services provided by the insurance agent) whereas unit trust can purchase via on-line? (without any agent to represent).

Can the potential policyholders who wanted to purchase policies avoid going thru an agent and make the purchases directly thru the Insurance company.

In this case, the potential policyholders can SAVE a substantial amount by reducing the distribution costs.

Thank you,

YM

December 29, 2008 9:56 AM
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The FSA UK will remove commission by 2011 as a means of remuneration. It will be substituted by fees.In other words insurance products will not carry a commission or a small nominal commission for product pushers or a deep discount.The consumers will benefit from this change by paying a fee and they get responsible advice at lower cost than the embedded commission.
Cost is inversely related to return. Higher cost means your return and protection is low .This is the reason today Whole life and endowment are NOT value for money.
The operating cost of the company has gone up very much, especailly when CEO asking million dollar salary, senior management paid 3 times higher than before and every staff demanding higher pay. Who pays for them? You the consumers. Cost is high, investment return is low, where can can you get value for money for whole life or endowment?
You must as well invest on your own by using BTITR.
Nowdays,to hide the low protection and return the insurance company covers up with a lot of rubbish like retrenchment benefit, annuity conversion, 3times death beneift from accident, and OTHER CRAPS TO FOOL the customers.Customers don't buy craps.The basic benefits to look at are protection and return.
These 2 will give the peace of mind.

December 29, 2008 10:14 AM
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Insurance products should be available directly to savvy consumers
at a steep discount, commission free.
With or without insurance agents any difference?
Yes, you don't get screwed up by them.
No, you still get the product.
Hope there is a portal which sells insurance product without commission.

December 29, 2008 7:38 PM
Anonymous Anonymous said...

scrap commission and introduce fees and let's see how creative but unethical insurance agents go around them.
If MAS enforces the need based under section 27 and remove the commission that will knock the last nail to coffin of product sellers and pushers.Hope they will be introduced asap.

December 29, 2008 10:21 PM
Blogger Falcon said...

Mr Tan tried to do that during his last few months in Income. He tried to remove the high commission by allowing policyholders to deal directly with the Business Centre. This is a good strategy that has two aims. One is to benefit directly the policyholder in terms of cost savings. The other aim is to stimulate and provide competition so insurance agents will try to improve their product knowledge and service standards in order to justify the premiums earned by them. Even I, an ordinary policyholder, can see that but the top management of Income cannot see that and succumb to the populist move to discredit Mr Tan as many powerful agents with links to the leadership lobby for his removal. It is the ordinary policyholders who are now poorer for it.

December 30, 2008 12:15 AM
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Knowledge and skill ntuc agents are lacking. They could sell because of the brand name built up by Mr. TanKL over the last 30 years. Cooperative was Mr. TKL and consumers trust the name not because of the skill of the agents.Today, although ntuc is no longer a cooperative poeple still trust. Many people still don't know that the products are no more value for money. NTUC revosave is very expensive and return is so low and agents misrepresented them.
Now the new management is trying to call ntuc social enterprise.It is a big bullshit. It is no surprise that this new team is rewarding themselves with policyholders' money and refund them poor return.

December 30, 2008 9:15 AM
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I did not know that NTUC Income is now no longer a co-operative. I thought it is still a co-operative but have a commercial CEO to do the dirty work.

December 30, 2008 4:40 PM

 

[Ah Hai]

Re: Survey on Distribution Cost of Life Insurance Policy

Anonymous said...

This foreigner is a big time product pushers. The new products rolled out by him are meant for pushing. Just name which product by him is useful as a financial vehicle to address financial needs. Revosave is rubbish. Which area of needs can revosave address? Maybe at the best diluted. It is a little of this and that..intended to deceive. Ask him and his senior managers and the so called financial consultants , salesmen in disguise, whether they buy revosave. I bet none maybe some idiotic consultants, the blur ones.
MAS must audit this company, everyone and the agents for mis-selling and misrepresentation.
I wonder how many victims who have their finances screwed up by them.

January 01, 2009 11:07 AM
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Today the products are more expensive because the cost of operation has gone enormously.Every wants high pay.Who is paying for them?It is obvious the consumers.
The worst hit products are the whole life and the endwoment. They shouldn't be sold for a number of reasons, poor protection and return .
But they are the most popular with agents and the companies because they are lucrative. The suckers are the consumers who are saddled with long locked in, poor return, low protection and many other penalties.
Consumers should realise that these products are to be avoided and don't let insurance agents fool and cheat you into buying.
Those who bought them and have no idea how they work for you , should bring this up for review when Mr. Tan set up the association, FISCA. You will be shocked that you have been walking around with a time bomb because of your greedy agents who didn't put your interest first.

January 01, 2009 3:16 PM
Anonymous Anonymous said...

NTUC is only cooperative in name.The agents are non cooperative. They only want to sell you products with the highest commission and not products that meet your financial needs.They are no longer caring and honest. The misrepresneted the products to make you buy, eg like revosave although they know the product doesn't help you and add value to your financial future.
The products are rip off without money for value and they are shoved down the throat of the man in the street because they are too trusting.
The management is high and mighty and has no touch with the ground. They dine and wine in high and posh places with policyholders' fund. They are good at wayang. The truth is they are hiding the truth.

January 01, 2009 5:53 PM
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Mr. Tan, quickly set up the FISCA and help to review these people's policies to check if they were taken a ride by their insurance agents.
It seems more people are distrusting the agents. The insurance agents are getting bad reputation as being dishonest and unethical. But be careful, many have changed their titles to consultants. Example, the ntuc salesmen have changed to financial consultants. Some even have senior and executive to the titles. Anyway ,we know ntuc insurance agents are all product pushers. They can change to fanciful titles but they still can't consult or advise, so no point having titles like these.They can bluff other people but they can't bluff us.They can't hold a financial calculator how can they be called a financial consultant..This is misleading and misrepresenting. It is cheating and cheating is serious. MAS must know about this. I wonder ntuc informed MAS about the titles.

January 02, 2009 12:28 AM
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Aiyah, so many good men and women has been warning the new policyholders not to buy these policies, but how many listen? For us old policyholders if no more people buy then our payout for our policies will be badly affected. Already they are losing so much money recently and coupled with their high dine and wine approach the returns are going to be worse from now onwards. Let these new policyholders buy lah, after all they are not our money. If more people buy then at least our existing policies will not be affected in payout that badly. Who knows, maybe if many many new policyholders buy then our returns will become better.
So please buy more so the new foreign management can wine and dine more and be happy then give us back more. Huat Arh!!!

January 02, 2009 3:31 AM
Anonymous Anonymous said...

As you have said more money to them means more money to spend. Do you know it it sending a few hundred greedy agents to Goldcoast . The last time they spent 1 million to Ho Chi Ming. What do you think of the amount this time?
Anyway not their money but your and mine. After spending they can blame it on investment loss...Maybe another round of bonus cut..cut cut until no need to cut even during the worst time.
Some one was saying that NTUC no need to cut bonus next year when others might cut. BUt he forgot that ntuc cut 45% already much earlier than the rest.
But foreign managemnt is clever They make every body happy, the agents and the staff and whatever they do no one can notice, lah.

January 02, 2009 12:26 PM

 

[Ah Hai]

Results - Rating of Politicial Leaders

riday, January 02, 2009
Results - Rating of Politicial Leaders
Here are the ratings based on 50 replies.
The rating is: 1=low respect, 3 = neutral, 5 = high respect.

JBJ 3.83
CST 3.71
LTK 3.39
TT 3.31
LKY 3.02
KBW 2.90
LHL 2.67
SJ 2.65
GCT 2.60
TCH 2.60
CSJ 2.55
... plus 4 more
Posted by Tan Kin Lian at 10:25 PM
7 comments:

K Das said...

I am surprised with the rankings showing now. My all time favourite is GCT. He should be in the super league with LKY and JBJ. Another well liked politician (as Minister by the public and as excellent leader/boss by staff) and rising star is TCH. Ranking does not seem to do justice to him. CSJ deserves much more for his intellect, guts and perseverance. I am afraid CST and LTK should not be there where they are and they are miles off match to the likes of JBJ, David Marshall and Dr Lee Siew Choh
January 03, 2009 12:20 AM
Anonymous said...

What is the rating for SR Nathan? Why not post it to see how the highest office bearer of our country is rated by Singaporeans?
January 03, 2009 12:44 AM
Tan Kin Lian said...

Hi K Das

You have to accept the views of 50 people. The rating do not match my own views (and I did not vote), but I wanted to know what other people think.

It appears that those who voted are "anti-establishment" and that the pro-establishment are not visiting my blog, or are also not happy with the "establishment".

Let us see if the rating changes, when 100 people have given their assessments.
January 03, 2009 2:40 AM
C H Yak said...

Hi Mr Tan

I guess you now get my previous point about survey results being "biased" if it is through an open survey of this sort through the internet.

Unless it is a marketing survey like "what taste of Cola" is preferred by the general public, this method may still work if you post it on your blog.

If it is a survey to gauge the response to your website, it may still work.

To be really meaningful you must pick 100 people who are representative of the whole population, and send them this questionaire. This target is dependent on the AIM of the survey. And if 25 do get back, it would be a pretty good sampling.

Even if you hand this same questionaire to 100 people at HLP, the results may still be biased, because it should be 100 people walking on the street instead.

To interpret based on 100 replies, the target "population" should be at least 400~500 people who must be representative, and not just only 100 people who tend to read your blog.
January 03, 2009 10:42 AM
Ghim Moh resident said...

I had difficulty reading some of the short forms.
January 03, 2009 11:06 AM
Anonymous said...

PAP members did not do that well not because the voters were "anti-establishment". I would look at it as they have not performed up to the high expectations and hope that we have in our leaders.
January 03, 2009 12:01 PM
K Das said...

Dear Mr. Tan,

Please don't get me wrong. I have a solid mind of my own and anti-establishment and pro-establishment sentiments do not cloud my thinking.

If my constituency happens to be a single ward and Chew Soon Juan were to contest there I would vote for him (despite all things said about him), short of he taking on a Minister. To me a Minister represents the Government and in defeating him you are rejecting the Government symbolically. This is unacceptable to me because I want to continue to have a PAP government now and for the foreseeable future. The problem would arise if all constituencies were to go GRC helmed by Ministers. My wish is that the Government reduce or make redundant the GRCs for single ward constituencies. We can explore other means to ensure minority representation.

Likewise if you were to contest for Presidency, I have no qualms about voting for you. For me Presidency is an independent institution in some way de-linked to the government. But if you were to join forces with like-minded people to contest in the GE as a GRC team. I am not for it. I suspect you may win and this may precipitate the emergence of a new formidable force, which can be unsettling to many and to Singapore given the current realities. If political arena is your calling, come over to my imaginary single ward constituency where my vote for you is assured subject to the Ministerial caveat of course!

You are a good man. May God’s grace be with you. All my best wishes to you.
January 03, 2009 12:03 PM

 

[Ah Hai]

Thought for the Day: study of history

Saturday, January 03, 2009
Thought for the Day: study of history
Contributed by Ho Cheow Seng

"The study of history is a powerful antidote to contemporary arrogance. It is humbling to discover how many of our glib assumptions, which seem to us novel and plausible, have been tested before, not once but many times and in innumerable guises; and discovered to be, at great human cost, wholly false."
- Paul Johnson
Posted by Tan Kin Lian at 3:37 PM

 

[Ah Hai]

Re: Thought for the Day: study of history

Saturday, January 03, 2009
Rating of political leaders
Rating of political leaders, based on first 50 and 100 responses.
1=low rating, 3=neutral rating, 5=high rating

Leader 50 resp 100 resp
JBJ 3.83 4.02
CST 3.71 3.65
TT 3.31 3.43
LTK 3.39 3.34
LKY 3.02 3.10
KBW 2.90 3.00
SJ 2.65 2.77
TCH 2.60 2.71
GCT 2.60 2.70
CSJ 2.55 2.67
LHL 2.67 2.65

Excluding lowest 4 ratings.
Posted by Tan Kin Lian at 9:51 PM

 

[Ah Hai]

Re: Thought for the Day: study of history

Sunday, January 04, 2009
Survey of Taxi Drivers on SMS booking
http://www.surveymonkey.com/s.aspx?sm=NvyTAfd_2faaNY1x3YRfEsWA_3d_3d
Posted by Tan Kin Lian at 9:06 AM 0 comments Links to this post
The mortgage crisis explained

http://clusterstock.alleyinsider.com/2009/1/the-mortgage-crisis-explained
Posted by Tan Kin Lian at 6:27 AM 0 comments

 

[Ah Hai]

Partial retreat from globalisation

Monday, January 05, 2009
Partial retreat from globalisation
RBS's shift towards its home market is a microcosm of what most banks are doing all over the world.

And as banks do their patriotic duty and direct their increasingly precious and scare capital resources towards their domestic markets, the amount of credit available in the world as a whole is being compressed.

What's going on can be seen as a partial retreat from globalisation in the financial economy.

The scale and longevity of that retreat in this new year will determine all our economic fortunes, wherever we may be in the world.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/robertpeston/2009/01/british_banks_have_to_lend_mor.html#top

Posted by Tan Kin Lian at 3:38 AM

 

[Ah Hai]

A survey is useful, in spite of its limitations

Monday, January 05, 2009
A survey is useful, in spite of its limitations
I am actively using surveys in this blog. I find the results to be useful, as follows:

> It collects the views of a larger number of persons (instead of one person's views)
> Usually 25 replies are sufficient, as results are usually close to a larger sample
> The respondents are usually random and generally unbiased.

There are obvious limitations - hence the results have to be used with caution. Furthermore, it is important to phrase the questions fairly, so as to obtain useful answers.

Some people argue that it is important to select a proper sample. I agree, but this is costly and difficult to achieve. In the absense of this budget and luxury, a simple sample survey on the internet is better than nothing. As someone said, "knowledge is everything".

I wish to encourage people to use sample surveys to gather information for business and social decision.
Posted by Tan Kin Lian at 7:29 AM

 

[Ah Hai]

Website to post results of surveys

Monday, January 05, 2009
Website to post results of surveys
I wish to ask for a volunteer to manage a blog to post the results of the surveys. I need the survey results to be presented in a chart (where appropriate) and to write some comments. This person should be able to use an appropriate software (e.g. WordPress or Blogger). If you are interested to spend time on a vountary basis, send an e-mail to [email protected].
Posted by Tan Kin Lian at 8:53 AM

 

[Ah Hai]

Feeder service

Monday, January 05, 2009
Feeder service

Survey:
http://www.surveymonkey.com/s.aspx?sm=scXwXJF8mtnVGQ2i806Zbg_3d_3d
Posted by Tan Kin Lian at 9:37 AM

 

[Ah Hai]

Re: Feeder service

Tuesday, January 06, 2009
Survey - life insurance policy
This is a summary of 24 replies.
http://www.surveymonkey.com/s.aspx?sm=AaicemJhQmUXu8DitwJm8Q_3d_3d

3. Did the agent give you a benefit illustration for the life insurance policy?

Yes - the agent explained the content clearly 50.0%
Yes - the agent did not go through the content clearly 45.8%
No - I did not receive it 4.2%

4. How long did the agent explain the benefit illustration?

Less than 15 mins 41.7%
15 mins to 1 hour 29.2%
More than 1 hour 29.2%

5. Did the agent explain the "distribution cost" to you, as shown in the benefit illustration?

Yes - I am clear 21.7%
Yes - but I am not clear about it 13.0%
No 65.2%

6. Can you check the amount of distribution cost that is shown in the benefit illustration. How do you feel about this amount?

It is a fair amount to pay to the agent as commission 21.7%
It is too much to pay to the agent 78.3%

7. Would you have bought the life insurance policy, if the distribution cost has been explained to you?

Yes 50.0%
No 50.0%

8. Do you prefer to pay seperately for independent financial advice ($200 to $500), so as to save on the distribution cost that is embedded in the policy?

I prefer to pay for independent financial advice 66.7%
I prefer to have the distribution cost embedded in the product 33.3%

9. Should it be made compulsory for the distribution cost to be put in bold on the front page of the benefit illustration?

Yes 91.7%
No 8.3%

10. Should the Authority place certain limit on the distribution cost, not to exceed a certain percentage of the yearly premium?

Yes 100.0%
No 0.0%
Posted by Tan Kin Lian at 8:30 AM

 

[Ah Hai]

Re: Feeder service

Tuesday, January 06, 2009
Survey – a service to business
1. Introduction
Knowledge is everything. It is important for a business to know what its customers, employees and other stakeholders think and what drives their behaviour and action.

A survey is useful in getting information that can help you to make the right decisions.

We provide a service to help you to design the survey questions and to give you a link that you can send to your target audience. They click on the link to reply to the survey. It is easy.

We will give you a weekly progress report until the survey is closed.

2. Cost
The cost is modest. You pay a fee of $1 per survey reply, subject to a minimum of $100 per survey. There is no additional charge to create the survey form of up to 15 questions. For each additional question, there is a charge of $3.

3. Contact us
If you are interested in this service, send an e-mail to [email protected] with the following:

Your name:
Your company name:
Your e-mail:
Your mobile nr:

A list of survey questions
Posted by Tan Kin Lian at 10:11 AM

 

[Ah Hai]

Life in Singapore

Wednesday, January 07, 2009
Life in Singapore

How do you feel about life in Singapore?

http://www.surveymonkey.com/s.aspx?sm=BXcsoNS8Zotk8ES_2fDxsL1g_3d_3d
Posted by Tan Kin Lian at 8:06 AM

 

[Ah Hai]

Life in Singapore

Wednesday, January 07, 2009
Life in Singapore
This survey is popular. 25 people responded within 1 hour. Here is a summary of the replies.

1. Your age group

Below 20: 0.0%
21 to 30: 13.0%
31 to 40: 21.7%
41 to 50: 26.1%
51 to 60: 30.4%
Above 60: 8.7%

2. Your annual income

Below $10,000: 21.7%
$10,001 to $20,000: 8.7%
$21,001 to $30,000: 4.3%
$31,000 to $40,000: 4.3%
$40,001 to $50,000: 4.3%
Above $50,000: 56.5%

3. Please indicate your feeling about the following aspects of life in Singapore
Very unhappy = 1, neutral = 3, very happy = 5

Safety 4.12
Law, order 4.08
Multi-racial culture 3.52
My neighbours 3.36
People I work with 3.32
Environment 3.32
Quality of life: 3.30
Climate 3.24
Time to spend with family 3.08
Adequate wages 16.0%: 2.92
Transport system 2.84
Education system 2.80
Time to enjoy 2.68
Singaporeans in general 2.64
Foreign workers 2.64
Government leaders 2.64
National Service 2.38
Taxes, GST, Govt charges 2.24
Cost of living 1.96
Posted by Tan Kin Lian at 10:02 AM 0 comments Links to this post
Life in Singapore

 

[Ah Hai]

Life in Singapore (2)

Wednesday, January 07, 2009
Life in Singapore (2)
Here is a summary based on 50 responses. This is a popular survey.

1. Your age group

Below 20: 0.0%
21 to 30: 18.4%
31 to 40: 30.6%
41 to 50: 18.4%
51 to 60: 28.6%
Above 60: 4.1%

2. Your annual income

Below $10,000: 18.4%
$10,001 to $20,000: 6.1%
$21,001 to $30,000: 8.2%
$31,000 to $40,000: 4.1%
$40,001 to $50,000: 4.1%
Above $50,000: 59.2%

3. Please indicate your feeling about the following aspects of life in Singapore
Very unhappy = 1, neutral = 3, very happy = 5

Safety 4.22
Law, order 4.04
Multi-racial culture 3.43
Environment 3.42
People I work with 3.25
My neighbors 3.22
Quality of life 3.10
Time to spend with family 3.10
Climate 2.98
Singaporeans in general 2.84
Adequate wages 2.82
Time to enjoy 2.76
Education system 2.65
Transport system 2.59
Government leaders 2.45
Foreign workers 2.45
National Service 2.44
Taxes, GST, Govt charges 2.12
Cost of living 1.94
Posted by Tan Kin Lian at 5:53 PM

 

[Ah Hai]

Constructive total loss of vehicle

Wednesday, January 07, 2009
Constructive total loss of vehicle
Dear Mr Tan,

I bought a comprehensive motor insurance on my vehicle. Unfortunately, I met an accident and the the insurance company informed me that they are only willing to pay me based on the OMV of my car (PARF and COE $28,800/-) value plus cash of $1,000/- ( approx $30,000/-). My vehicle is coming to 5 years old, the cost of repair is estimated to be around $15,000/-.

They claim that it is no longer economical to repair the car. May I know my position in this situation.

REPLY
Under the insurance policy contract, the insurance company has the option to pay the current market value of the vehicle, instead of repairing it. This is called a "constructive total loss".

Usually, if you get the current market value, you will be able to buy a vehicle of similar age and condition as your insured vehicle. If you find that it is not possible to get a replacement vehicle, you can discuss with the insurance company to find a better solution.
Posted by Tan Kin Lian at 6:53 PM