Why BEST Paid Govt Offer Such Miserable Protection?

[makapaaa]

<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR>Higher cover for bank deposits
</TR><!-- headline one : end --><!-- show image if available --></TBODY></TABLE>




<!-- START OF : div id="storytext"--><!-- more than 4 paragraphs -->THE United States Senate has just approved the amended bailout Bill. Among other things, it has raised the ceiling on federal insurance for bank deposits from US$100,000 (S$145,000) to US$250,000, a move to reassure savers their money is safe in banks and avoid mass withdrawals.
Ireland has also guaranteed full cover for bank deposits.
The Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) has said that Singapore dollar bank deposits are covered up to $20,000 per depositor per bank under the current deposit insurance scheme. It said 'our primary objective is to provide adequate protection for small depositors'.
MAS also said 'for protection for insurance policy owners, MAS requires all insurers to establish a separate fund for each class of business' and 'each fund's assets must, at all times, exceed its liabilities plus a safety margin imposed by MAS'.
There are two anomalies in these statements: Why are small depositors better protected than large ones? And why is the MAS requirement for protection for insurance policy owners not applicable to bank depositors who have put in their money in banks for safe keeping rather than investment and therefore deserve equal protection?
Grassroots organisations like the citizens' consultative committees throughout Singapore have set up welfare funds and are required to deposit tens of thousands of dollars in banks for safe keeping. So are charitable organisations which deposit millions of dollars. For them, $20,000 is far from adequate.
In the light of these developments, it is time to review and improve the current limit of $20,000, so all depositors are better and equally protected. They deserve this protection to have peace of mind that their hard-earned funds raised over time for community welfare and charity are not wiped out overnight by more than 90 per cent. Although this is most unlikely, they need this assurance all the same. Lee Seng Giap

 

[jw5]

<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR>Higher cover for bank deposits
</TR><!-- headline one : end --><!-- show image if available --></TBODY></TABLE>




<!-- START OF : div id="storytext"--><!-- more than 4 paragraphs -->THE United States Senate has just approved the amended bailout Bill. Among other things, it has raised the ceiling on federal insurance for bank deposits from US$100,000 (S$145,000) to US$250,000, a move to reassure savers their money is safe in banks and avoid mass withdrawals.
Ireland has also guaranteed full cover for bank deposits.
The Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) has said that Singapore dollar bank deposits are covered up to $20,000 per depositor per bank under the current deposit insurance scheme. It said 'our primary objective is to provide adequate protection for small depositors'.
MAS also said 'for protection for insurance policy owners, MAS requires all insurers to establish a separate fund for each class of business' and 'each fund's assets must, at all times, exceed its liabilities plus a safety margin imposed by MAS'.
There are two anomalies in these statements: Why are small depositors better protected than large ones? And why is the MAS requirement for protection for insurance policy owners not applicable to bank depositors who have put in their money in banks for safe keeping rather than investment and therefore deserve equal protection?
Grassroots organisations like the citizens' consultative committees throughout Singapore have set up welfare funds and are required to deposit tens of thousands of dollars in banks for safe keeping. So are charitable organisations which deposit millions of dollars. For them, $20,000 is far from adequate.
In the light of these developments, it is time to review and improve the current limit of $20,000, so all depositors are better and equally protected. They deserve this protection to have peace of mind that their hard-earned funds raised over time for community welfare and charity are not wiped out overnight by more than 90 per cent. Although this is most unlikely, they need this assurance all the same. Lee Seng Giap

It's not their money, that's why.

 

[DIVISION1]

From the threads that moniker makapaaa has posted, it suggests that moniker makapaaa is interested only in unsustainable immediate self-gratification and protection at the expense of future generations. It is intriguing to wonder what would moniker makapaaa's response be if the limit in Singapore were raised higher than the United States. Bank limits should be set commensurate to the economic power of the nation. In addition, moniker makapaaa has failed to highlight the even higher guarantee limit from CPF savings.


I refer to MOM's archived government response on the CPF as follows:
<Source: http://www.mom.gov.sg/publish/momportal/en/press_room/press_replies/2008/Safeguards_CPF.htm>

"CPF savings are invested in Special Singapore Government Securities (SSGS), hence the interest rates and principal amounts placed in all CPF accounts are guaranteed by the Singapore Government."

 

[makapaaa]

From the threads that moniker makapaaa has posted, it suggests that moniker makapaaa is interested only in unsustainable immediate self-gratification and protection at the expense of future generations. It is intriguing to wonder what would moniker makapaaa's response be if the limit in Singapore were raised higher than the United States. Bank limits should be set commensurate to the economic power of the nation. In addition, moniker makapaaa has failed to highlight the even higher guarantee limit from CPF savings.


I refer to MOM's archived government response on the CPF as follows:
<SOURCE: Safeguards_CPF.htm 2008 press_replies press_room en momportal publish www.mom.gov.sg http:>

"CPF savings are invested in Special Singapore Government Securities (SSGS), hence the interest rates and principal amounts placed in all CPF accounts are guaranteed by the Singapore Government."

Sounds like u're referring to your Familee owners.