OK PAP relents.. no more minimum sum plus 30% bonus on your cpf funds at 55

[winnipegjets]

If you put $10k in your CPF account annually for 30 years earning returns of 8 percent each year...you would have $1.35 million.

That's the kind of retirement returns I expect when 20 percent is deducted from my pay.

 

[eatshitndie]

If you put $10k in your CPF account annually for 30 years earning returns of 8 percent each year...you would have $1.35 million.

That's the kind of retirement returns I expect when 20 percent is deducted from my pay.

this is what happens when you don't have the pap managing your retirement portfolio and instead invest on your own thinking a 10-14% roi is out of this world..... :p

http://www.sfgate.com/business/netw...Fargo-broker-banned-from-industry-5511548.php

 

[winnipegjets]

this is what happens when you don't have the pap managing your retirement portfolio and instead invest on your own thinking a 10-14% roi is out of this world..... :p

http://www.sfgate.com/business/netw...Fargo-broker-banned-from-industry-5511548.php

Do you read? I stated 8 percent return. That's a very CONSERVATIVE long term investment return. Please read up before you post because you are eroding your little credibility each time you post.

Let me enlighten you ...you can set up a portfolio that can generate this returns with just 5 etfs. You don't even need a financial adviser to do that.

 

[eatshitndie]

Do you read? I stated 8 percent return. That's a very CONSERVATIVE long term investment return. Please read up before you post because you are eroding your little credibility each time you post.

the link i posted pays better than 8%, which is a red flag. that should be a warning for all. anything considered "conservative" that is over 5% has amber alert written all over it. anything over 7% is usually classified as moderately aggressive (and should warrant suspicion and due diligence), not conservative. :p

 

[winnipegjets]

the link i posted pays better than 8%, which is a red flag. that should be a warning for all. anything considered "conservative" that is over 5% has amber alert written all over it. anything over 7% is usually classified as moderately aggressive (and should warrant suspicion and due diligence), not conservative. :p

You don't know what you are talking about, sadly for someone who is an entrepreneur. Want me to invest for you then?

The average return of S&P from 1980-2013 is 13.29 percent. You can buy an ETF of the S&P to achieve that return. Any other questions?

 

[winnipegjets]

You don't know what you are talking about, sadly for someone who is an entrepreneur. Want me to invest for you then?

The average return of S&P from 1980-2013 is 13.29 percent. You can buy an ETF of the S&P to achieve that return. Any other questions?

During the said period, there were five years of negative returns, namely 1981 (-5.33), 1990 (-3.42), 2000 (-9.11), 2001 (-11.98), 2002 (-22.27) & 2008 (-37.22). Despite of that, the average return was 13.29 percent!!!! This is an investment period of 33 years.

This shows how much the PAP government has robbed sinkees of their retirement savings!!!!

 

[winnipegjets]

During the said period, there were five years of negative returns, namely 1981 (-5.33), 1990 (-3.42), 2000 (-9.11), 2001 (-11.98), 2002 (-22.27) & 2008 (-37.22). Despite of that, the average return was 13.29 percent!!!! This is an investment period of 33 years.

This shows how much the PAP government has robbed sinkees of their retirement savings!!!!

Since you have so much dough, you should have invested a million with David Tepper 20 years ago. Now, you would be sitting on $149 million!
Do your kids a favour, invest the money with David Tepper for them.

 

[eatshitndie]

During the said period, there were five years of negative returns, namely 1981 (-5.33), 1990 (-3.42), 2000 (-9.11), 2001 (-11.98), 2002 (-22.27) & 2008 (-37.22). Despite of that, the average return was 13.29 percent!!!! This is an investment period of 33 years.

This shows how much the PAP government has robbed sinkees of their retirement savings!!!!

33 years on the s&p?! of course, you can retire on the s&p if you invest a huge chuck of your principal 33 years ago. why not google stock when it went ipo? there's no end to this debate if you stretch the timeline and look at it from hindsight. real estate is much better than s&p 500. if i were to purchase a single family home in sunnyvale for usd150k 33 years ago, i could pay it off in 10 years and sell it for usd1.5m today. many more times than 13.29%. the same thing can be said about sg real estate. a big chunk of a sinkie's cpf that goes into a sinkie home has allowed the sinkie to reap the rewards of asset appreciation without forking out large sums of cash or savings outside of the cpf. that alone is far better than 13.29% on the s&p for 33 years. :p

 

[Leongsam]

33 years on the s&p?! of course, you can retire on the s&p if you invest a huge chuck of your principal 33 years ago. why not google stock when it went ipo? there's no end to this debate if you stretch the timeline and look at it from hindsight. real estate is much better than s&p 500. if i were to purchase a single family home in sunnyvale for usd150k 33 years ago, i could pay it off in 10 years and sell it for usd1.5m today. many more times than 13.29%. the same thing can be said about sg real estate. a big chunk of a sinkie's cpf that goes into a sinkie home has allowed the sinkie to reap the rewards of asset appreciation without forking out large sums of cash or savings outside of the cpf. that alone is far better than 13.29% on the s&p for 33 years. :p

I used CPF to buy 3 homes.. the one I lived in plus two smaller investment units. Returns were about 15% per annum over the 9 to 12 years that I held on to them. That's why I say PAP IS THE BEST AND CPF IS THE BEST! :p

People like to throw around glamorous yield numbers of various funds but ultimately, what percentage of your portfolio you put in to an asset, when you put it in and when you take it out are all individual choices and it is these personal decisions that determine the overall yield of your assets. Graphs tell you nothing. They look backwards not forwards.

I bought Apple shares at about USD9 when Steve came back because I had faith in his abilities. He did a fantastic job and I sold most of my Apple stock between USD50 and USD80. Why didn't I wait till it started trading above USD500? The answer is I didn't have a graph which showed where it was going.. only where it had been.

 

[eatshitndie]

I used CPF to buy 3 homes.. the one I lived in plus two smaller investment units. Returns were about 15% per annum over the 9 to 12 years that I held on to them. That's why I say PAP IS THE BEST AND CPF IS THE BEST! :p

People like to throw around glamorous yield numbers of various funds but ultimately, what percentage of your portfolio you put in to an asset, when you put it in and when you take it out are all individual choices and it is these personal decisions that determine the overall yield of your assets. Graphs tell you nothing. They look backwards not forwards.

I bought Apple shares at about USD9 when Steve came back because I had faith in his abilities. He did a fantastic job and I sold most of my Apple stock between USD50 and USD80. Why didn't I wait till it started trading above USD500? The answer is I didn't have a graph which showed where it was going.. only where it had been.

cpf allowed me to finance my 1st home. i sold it at twice the original value, and with the profit and cash withdrawn out of cpf after i'd given up on sg citizenship, i was able to purchase a home in the bay area with more than 20% down. that home today is 4 times its original value. if i were to remain in sg and kept the home, the value would have increased 8 times over the original. and i would have leveraged the gain to go after new properties. either way, i would be more well off, thanks to the opportunity that cpf had offered to overcome that very difficult initial threshold of capital bump that one needed in early adult life. yes, agree that cpf is the best!

 

[kaipoh]

Ok, this is not a cpf scam, you need to do a bit of work, go into agriculture biz be a modern farmer, manage your own farm. I just started doing it & hope to reap my crop in 4 months' time. Eg. for $2.00 papaya you purchase and eat it, after eating, you plant the hundreds papaya seed, months later you have hundreds of papaya trees and reap thousand of crop sell them, you got tangible profits of $xxxxxxx - if you have any crops sell them to me, thank you.

I want to know, how to spin?

 

[kaipoh]

This theory works when the result always moving north. If the result is moving south, you will die very ugly- like the investment guru Robert Kiyosaki (Rich Papa & Poor Papa).

cpf allowed me to finance my 1st home. i sold it at twice the original value, and with the profit and cash withdrawn out of cpf after i'd given up on sg citizenship, i was able to purchase a home in the bay area with more than 20% down. that home today is 4 times its original value. if i were to remain in sg and kept the home, the value would have increased 8 times over the original. and i would have leveraged the gain to go after new properties. either way, i would be more well off, thanks to the opportunity that cpf had offered to overcome that very difficult initial threshold of capital bump that one needed in early adult life. yes, agree that cpf is the best!

 

[da dick]

Exactly what I'm saying.......the life expectancy of those born in 2013 is 82.5 years (both sexes ave).
But surely we're not born in 2013, or are we saying they're treating us like 3 year old?

Give me a break...what a pack of lies.....as evidence tell me many of people I know who are dying now are 65 years old and younger.

Hence, this below statistics (assuming it is not massaged) used to increase the withdrawal age because of the lie that we're living till age 85 now, is applicable only for those born in 2013 and beyond, so it is irrelevant. It is a complete lie!! We don't live so long. The baby boomers do not live so long.

KNN...

fuck , you're right. life expectancy rose by about 0.36 yrs per year at birth, so if assuming linear increase, my life expectancy should be around 69, as i was born in early 80s. which mean, i will only get about 4 years of annuality before i die. rip off!! if i have even only 100K in my CPF when i reach 65, i'll get less than half of it before i die!

 

[winnipegjets]

I used CPF to buy 3 homes.. the one I lived in plus two smaller investment units. Returns were about 15% per annum over the 9 to 12 years that I held on to them. That's why I say PAP IS THE BEST AND CPF IS THE BEST! :p

People like to throw around glamorous yield numbers of various funds but ultimately, what percentage of your portfolio you put in to an asset, when you put it in and when you take it out are all individual choices and it is these personal decisions that determine the overall yield of your assets. Graphs tell you nothing. They look backwards not forwards.

I bought Apple shares at about USD9 when Steve came back because I had faith in his abilities. He did a fantastic job and I sold most of my Apple stock between USD50 and USD80. Why didn't I wait till it started trading above USD500? The answer is I didn't have a graph which showed where it was going.. only where it had been.

There are few who made dough from the CPF scheme but the CPF is intended to serve the majority of sinkees, not the 20 percent.
For the majority the CPF is a bad deal.

When you can't handle the truth from data, you run back to individual stories to support your view and then generalize that as the norm.

 

[winnipegjets]

33 years on the s&p?! of course, you can retire on the s&p if you invest a huge chuck of your principal 33 years ago. why not google stock when it went ipo? there's no end to this debate if you stretch the timeline and look at it from hindsight.

The CPF holds your money for 33 years and pays you the pittance interest. Do you know how to read?

real estate is much better than s&p 500. if i were to purchase a single family home in sunnyvale for usd150k 33 years ago, i could pay it off in 10 years and sell it for usd1.5m today. many more times than 13.29%. the same thing can be said about sg real estate. a big chunk of a sinkie's cpf that goes into a sinkie home has allowed the sinkie to reap the rewards of asset appreciation without forking out large sums of cash or savings outside of the cpf. that alone is far better than 13.29% on the s&p for 33 years. :p

What baloney. You are a waste of time.

Property is only a good investment when you constantly flip it. If you buy at the high and the market tanks, you will be waiting at least a decade to get back even. Just ask those whose properties are underwater from the 2007 crash.
Ask those idiots in SG who paid $1 million for their pigeon hole if their hole has appreciate by that much.

 

[eatshitndie]

The CPF holds your money for 33 years and pays you the pittance interest. Do you know how to read?

What baloney. You are a waste of time.

you don't expect every sinkie paying into cpf to be wise with investments in s&p, do you? some will shine, and many will flop. if you open the gates wide on cpf, it will still come down to individual choices and personal decisions on what to do with the money. the outcome will most likely be a majority of sinkies lose their collective shirt on day two, and the gov will have to step in, tax the shit out of wealthy sinkies, and use the proceeds to provide relief to losers and morons. it will be a worst outcome.

if you find this discourse a waste of time, why are you replying? :*:

 

[sleaguepunter]

fuck , you're right. life expectancy rose by about 0.36 yrs per year at birth, so if assuming linear increase, my life expectancy should be around 69, as i was born in early 80s. which mean, i will only get about 4 years of annuality before i die. rip off!! if i have even only 100K in my CPF when i reach 65, i'll get less than half of it before i die!

without using the chart, i already doubt i can live till 70yo considering half of father's brothers are dead before 65yo, my father included. all suffer the same type of illness, seem to be in the genes. so the cpf life or whatever other cpf scheme dont appeal to me. i can forgo at 55yo but by 60yo, i die die want my cpf money back to at least have a few years to spend my own money and not my son spend on my behalf.:p

 

[Leongsam]

There are few who made dough from the CPF scheme but the CPF is intended to serve the majority of sinkees, not the 20 percent.
For the majority the CPF is a bad deal.

When you can't handle the truth from data, you run back to individual stories to support your view and then generalize that as the norm.

Data is nothing more than a collection of individual stories. Regardless of what individual stories there are to tell, the fact remains that CPF provides many options within a necessary forced saving framework.

Those who feel that they can get more out of the funds than the official interest rate will provide can exercise one or more of the options available.