We need sufficient people working in the public sector to deliver public services to the people. We need adequate numbers of teachers, nurses, doctors and policemen, in proportion to the population. If the population increases, we have to employ more public officers. In particular, we need more people in the police force to keep law and order, to investigate crime and fraud and to prosecute criminals. If the increase in public officers is in line with the popular, the total cost of public service will still remain at the same share of the national spending.
We should not try to keep down cost by employing insufficient public officers. We need sufficient manpower to maintain the standard of public service. We cannot expect over-worked officers to deliver the expected standard of service.
If we do not provide sufficient employment in the public sector, there will be insufficient jobs in the private sector to absorb the excess manpower. We should not have too many people selling insurance, property and financial products, as they do not add to the real wealth of the country, although they may create false wealth through asset bubbles.
We should also avoid paying high salaries to the top levels of the public sector to match the salaries in the private sector. The private sector salaries are likely to be excessive anyway, and should be moderated in some suitable way, e.g. to impose a high rate of tax on extremely high earnings. If we remove one top earner, we may be able to create jobs for 50 people at the working level.
Let us have a fair balance. We need adequate people in the public sector to provide an adequate level of service while keeping the cost at an acceptable level.
Tan Kin Lian
Monday, April 5, 2010
Quick action could have reduced number of spa victims
http://www.straitstimes.com/STForum/Story/STIStory_510873.html
My comment:
It is important for the Police to investigate a potential fraudulent practice promptly, rather than expect the public to provide evidence. The public do not have the resources and the power to carry out an investigation to produce the evidence.
There are several potentially fraudulent practices, such as land banking and get rick quick schemes. If the Police does not investigate, more people will fall victim to the frauds.
My comment:
It is important for the Police to investigate a potential fraudulent practice promptly, rather than expect the public to provide evidence. The public do not have the resources and the power to carry out an investigation to produce the evidence.
There are several potentially fraudulent practices, such as land banking and get rick quick schemes. If the Police does not investigate, more people will fall victim to the frauds.
Kirby McInerney on CNBC
Dear Best Friends and Business Associates,
Roger Kirby will be appearing on CNBC Asia Squawk Box Wednesday morning at 7:30AM Singapore time. He'll be interviewed from NY, and the anchors will be Martin Soong and Karen Tso. The topics that he will be discussing include:
1) What does your firm do for Asian investors?
1) What does your firm do for Asian investors?
2) What rights to Asian investors have in a US court?
3) What results have Asian investors received/could receive in a US court?
4) Are these cases worth it financially given the time involved in reaching a resolution?
5) Do you expect more cases to be brought?
6) Is fraud on the rise? In what sectors? In what ways?
7) What kind of regulation will prevent the fraud that has been committed?
Teo Guan Hock
Do not trust unrealistic projections
Dear Mr. Tan,
I would like to seek your advice on a policy which I had signed up, which is still within the 14 day free look period.
1) The benefit illustration of my policy showed that the "effect of deduction" drops significantly in the 25th year as compared to the 20th year. Would you know the reason for this?
Reply: I do not trust this type of projection where the effect of deduction drop "magically" after 20 years, i.e. the maturity value increases "magically" on the 25th year. When the time comes, the insurance company will find many excuses to tell you whey they are not able to pay out the "magical" increase. Remember, these figures are not guaranteed.
2) I am a bit confused as to which year I should take to calculate the "effect of deduction". Assuming 5.25% Investment Return, the effect of deduction at the 20th year is 37% while at the 25th year, it is 17%. The difference is vast and if I take the 20th year calculation, the policy is obviously too expensive but if I take the 25th year calculation, the policy appears reasonable. Can you advise which is the correct figure I should use?
Reply: Do not trust the "magical" figure shown on the 25th year.
3) I informed my agent that distribution cost works out to be 7.3% which is quite high in my opinion. However, he informed me that over 25 years, the distribution cost only works out to be 0.3% a year and that if I buy ETF yearly, the transaction costs will work to be around there. Is this argument valid?
Reply: If you invest in ETF, the distribution cost is 0.3% of the total invested sum, compared to 7.3% for the life insurance policy. It is dishonest for the agent to divide the 7.3% by 25 years and say that the cost is the same. The agent is telling you a blatant lie.
4) I informed my agent that I have heard horror stories of policies falling way off projected returns upon maturity. However, he mentioned that in the past, the projections were very high and that now, MAS has regulated the projections to be a very reasonable and definitely acheivable 5.25%. Again, is this true?
Reply: The horror story will happen again in the future, due to the unrealistic projection on the 25th year.
5) I highlighted that saving through ETF or investing in equities may yield more but my agent informed me that it is easier said than done and it takes a lot of discipline to keep investing and monitoring shares and buying the policy would be a disciplined way to save for the future. What do you think of this?
Reply: It is easy to keep investing in ETF. You will have better control of your money. There is no need to monitor the ETF as it is well diversified and invested in 30 large shares.
6) Finally, do you think that this policy is reasonable and I should keep it or is it too expensive and I should terminate it while I still can?
Reply: I would take advantage of the 14 day free look period, and give up the policy for a full refund.
You can buy my book, Practical Guide on Financial Planning here. Spend $12 and save a few thousand dollars. Be educated. Do not be misled by dishonest agents.
I would like to seek your advice on a policy which I had signed up, which is still within the 14 day free look period.
1) The benefit illustration of my policy showed that the "effect of deduction" drops significantly in the 25th year as compared to the 20th year. Would you know the reason for this?
Reply: I do not trust this type of projection where the effect of deduction drop "magically" after 20 years, i.e. the maturity value increases "magically" on the 25th year. When the time comes, the insurance company will find many excuses to tell you whey they are not able to pay out the "magical" increase. Remember, these figures are not guaranteed.
2) I am a bit confused as to which year I should take to calculate the "effect of deduction". Assuming 5.25% Investment Return, the effect of deduction at the 20th year is 37% while at the 25th year, it is 17%. The difference is vast and if I take the 20th year calculation, the policy is obviously too expensive but if I take the 25th year calculation, the policy appears reasonable. Can you advise which is the correct figure I should use?
Reply: Do not trust the "magical" figure shown on the 25th year.
3) I informed my agent that distribution cost works out to be 7.3% which is quite high in my opinion. However, he informed me that over 25 years, the distribution cost only works out to be 0.3% a year and that if I buy ETF yearly, the transaction costs will work to be around there. Is this argument valid?
Reply: If you invest in ETF, the distribution cost is 0.3% of the total invested sum, compared to 7.3% for the life insurance policy. It is dishonest for the agent to divide the 7.3% by 25 years and say that the cost is the same. The agent is telling you a blatant lie.
4) I informed my agent that I have heard horror stories of policies falling way off projected returns upon maturity. However, he mentioned that in the past, the projections were very high and that now, MAS has regulated the projections to be a very reasonable and definitely acheivable 5.25%. Again, is this true?
Reply: The horror story will happen again in the future, due to the unrealistic projection on the 25th year.
5) I highlighted that saving through ETF or investing in equities may yield more but my agent informed me that it is easier said than done and it takes a lot of discipline to keep investing and monitoring shares and buying the policy would be a disciplined way to save for the future. What do you think of this?
Reply: It is easy to keep investing in ETF. You will have better control of your money. There is no need to monitor the ETF as it is well diversified and invested in 30 large shares.
6) Finally, do you think that this policy is reasonable and I should keep it or is it too expensive and I should terminate it while I still can?
Reply: I would take advantage of the 14 day free look period, and give up the policy for a full refund.
You can buy my book, Practical Guide on Financial Planning here. Spend $12 and save a few thousand dollars. Be educated. Do not be misled by dishonest agents.
CNA More quit workforce in their 50s
Read this article in Channel News Asia.
My comment:
I believe that most people want to work to an older age, but they are likely to be retrenched due to restructuring of the company, the desire of the company to increase their profits by employing lower cost workers and the weak protection of workers' rights.
My comment:
I believe that most people want to work to an older age, but they are likely to be retrenched due to restructuring of the company, the desire of the company to increase their profits by employing lower cost workers and the weak protection of workers' rights.
Different management style
Dear Mr Tan,
After serving NTUC for 30 years, I must say that we have lost a caring leader that really look after the welfare and investment of policy holders. With the new comer, all the existing management staff who have followed you for many years have to give way !!! One of the “victim” is a friend of mine and I could not believe the way he has been treated. After spending almost all his life in this career, learning from your style of hard working and not to waste unnecessary money for any expenses related to work, he has to face a new comer after you left. With a promise of two years contract, he was asked to leave only half a year later after he has given his full collaboration to new staff understudy from him !
It appears the new management style of working is totally different from yours and the new policy is no longer “attractive” as before ! It is unfortunate to see such things happened in one of the most modern city in the world.
G
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)