Skip to main content

信心信任失去 公积金何以安心安全

*为何人们对私人保险公司的信心还高于政府的公积金局?

*为何国际上AAA评级,人们还是不放心政府的做账?



国人对行动党政府的信任指数一直往下滑。其实,国会根本就不用分上下两期,上半期的任务根本没有完成,为何来个下半期?你想一想,全国对话,人口政策,交通,组屋,公积金,这些大问题,本届国会根本就没有在上半期取得突破性进展,为何又来下半旗,继续糊涂百姓?

下半期,一开始就流年不利,一个政治建设,就把整个总统施政方针给搞乱了,再加上公积金的官司,简直就是,火上加油。原本是想要弥补上半期,无法完成的信任信心任务,以便为大选铺路,哪里知道,这个信心指数却被无名英雄,虎虎生威的给哄下去。

行动党想要在短期内,恢复元气,真的太难了。难就难在的困局,如何收拾,看来只有越描越黑;总理和行动党是越陷越深,如何摆脱公积金的两个大问题:

*为何人们对私人保险公司的信心还高于政府的公积金局?

*为何国际上AAA评级,人们还是不放心政府的做账?


公积金局不如保险公司?

公积金局的运作和目的,其实就像是保险公司的作法一样。公积金是强制性的,而向保险公司投保却是自愿性的。公积金的医药存款,医药保险,养老退休金,都是根据保险和精算的方法计算出来。如果要加上普通户头的投资(组屋,股票,黄金等), 就类似保险界的投资性保险,回报和风险的波动大,客户要冒一定的风险,万一投资不顺利,回报会偏低。

不论如何,保险公司是受到金融管理局管制和监控的。当然,公积金局的管制和监控比保险公司还要严格,它是受到新加坡宪法的保护和监控的。因此,

*为何人们对私人保险公司的信心还高于政府的公积金局呢?

你想一想,如果你对一家保险公司不信任,没有信心,你会把保费交给这家公司吗?你会比较,寻找一家适合的保险公司作为你的额外医药保险,人寿保险,健康保险,房地产保险,商业保险,等等的保险公司。当然,也有一些情形,你和银行贷款,就必须向银行指定的保险公司买保险,甚至于律师,也要根据银行的要求。这是有求于人的代价。

由于公积金是强制性的,你没有这个选择,即使你没有有求于人,也要交公积金。

现在,新加坡公积金制度出现信任危机,人们对它的回报不满,对它的透明度不满,对它没有信心,对它提供的保护网不满,对它的最低退休存款不满,太多的不满造成对政府的公信力下降,政府和人民的互信出现问题。不管政府怎么解释,反而激起更多的人不满,一个总理的公积金官司,在短短两三天,竟然能够获得人们的同情支持,筹款数目已经超过5万元。为何人们自愿的提供10元,20元,50元,甚至500元给一个不认识的人,这不是很明显对行动党不满,对公积金局的信任不够。
Funds Raised  by 1 June 2014 5pm
赢了官司,李显龙会为此输了选票吗?http://thehearttruths.com/


如果公积金局是一间私人保险公司,那么,人们就可以自由的退保,政府就无法控制人们的意愿,公积金局就会出现好像银行那样的挤兑现象,门口排长龙,人人要退保,要现金。

为何一个国家级的保险公司-公积金局,会出现这么大的信任危机,难道行动党这50年的经济,政治建设,没有办法留住人们的心吗?问题到底在哪里?

公积金的问题可以说是愈演愈烈,公积金局没有足够钱给会员这个问题,几十年前就已经在传开了。当时没有社交媒体,讨论的空间有限,即使不满也是局部,容易受到控制。行动党一直无法好好的处理这个问题,局部控制反而使到讨论电子化,一发不可收拾,到了今天这个地步。

相对来说,马来西亚和香港也都有类似公积金的制度,在这方面,他们也有不满,但是,不至于沦落到今天新加坡公积金局的地步,和对政府信心信任构成威胁。

因此,我们有必要检讨为何人们对公积金局的信心,对行动党政府的信任,会出现如此的落差?是总理说的正确政治,政治建设做得不够,还是做过了头,出现反效果。人民公仆如果无法取得人民的信任,后果将只有下台一条路。


国际评级高就等于账做对了吗?

由于信心信任出现问题,财政部特地在最近更新有关网页,从三方面(储备内容和管理,总统的权限,和公积金安全吗)对我国的储备做出进一步解释。其中特别指出新加坡是世界上少有的获得AAA信用评级的国家,因此,在国际上有信任度,外人对我们有信心。这是说给国人听的,意思是为何还要对储备,公积金质疑,外人都相信了,我们不应该自己怀疑自己。

在总统的保护储备的权限上,网页也解释当年前总统王鼎昌的疑问。也附上当时国会辩论相关课题的内容。财政部认为这是一个误解,政府并没有不提供资料给前总统,而是:

1。政府(总会计长)有提供实物资产的名单,但是没有估价。因为这需要56个人年来做这件事。
(56 man-years10 to conduct a complete valuation of the physical assets, even though he had already produced the listing (without valuation figures).#

2。不需要重新评估国家资产的价值。即使要,也是当资产出卖时,以市价来计算。no need to revalue all State properties)#

3。重新评估价值是浪费资源。因为第一, 土地没有出卖; 第二,土地的价值要看规划和位置所在的区域。(revaluation would be a waste of resources)

如果,我们想象新加坡政府是一家上市公司,它不公布土地价值,只给名单。它不评估资产的价值,卖的的时候才来根据市价来计算。它还大声的告诉天下人,估价是浪费时间和精力。你的信心和信任是否会动摇?

最近政府公布了一份报告,REIT产业信托不会影响中小型企业,产业信托没有影响租金,这些产业信托在股票市场上市,不知道它们有没有对手上的资产做估价?我们有没有产业股,不对手上的资产做估价的呢?股票市场是否容许不做估价,便让公司上市的特别例子呢?

因此,做账漂亮,AAA只是一个指标而已。不然,雷曼兄弟,恩龙,美国两大房地产公司的失败,也不会对股市造成冲击。他们的账经过国际大审计公司过目的,如果,根据财政部的说法,国际信用AAA没有问题,你会相信吗?

我在上几篇博文中提到,阿裕尼市镇会在账目交接的过程中出现了讯息空洞(Information gap), 上,下结账不对口,因此,造成审计问题。这样的问题,也只有在市镇会换人管理时才会出现。现在,公积金和储备的账目都在行动党政府手中,它以AAA来压人民,人民也是无话好说的。

如果真的的看账目,要看上下账对不对口,那就只有把行动党政府给换掉了。新政府看了账目后,可能出现三种情形:

1。上下对口,没有讯息空洞。一切正常。

2。上下不对口,出现讯息空洞。那就要看这个空洞有多大。如果现金不够,新政府很可能就要举债,向人民借钱,或是向国际金融机构贷款。

356人年的估价。 因为我们没有估价,只有资产名单。因为估价浪费时间和精力,这样一来,国际金融市场如何估价新元,世界各国如何跟一个没有估价的国家做生意,新加坡将出现一个不稳定的局面,而我们的资产底线到底在哪里?

其实,最令人害怕的是第三种情形的出现,人生有几个50年。行动党管理新加坡50多年,明年又是金喜年,真的需要56人年来估价国家资产吗?现在,已经是大数据时代,超级电脑的时代,行动党政府难道还要用算盘来算账吗?

#
http://app.mof.gov.sg/reserves_sectionthree.aspx
http://app.mof.gov.sg/reserves_sectiontwo.aspx

Q18. Did the Government fail to provide former President Ong Teng Cheong with sufficient information to protect the Past Reserves?
A misperception that crops up from time to time is that former President Ong had been denied the information needed for him to perform an effective role in protecting the Past Reserves. In fact, President Ong was given all the information required for the purpose. This information included the value of all the Government’s financial assets, as well as a listing of physical assets, such as buildings and land.
At his 16 July 1999 press conference, President Ong spoke of how he had been informed by the Accountant-General that it would take "52 man-years" to produce the value of the full list of physical assets of the Government.
The facts of the case were explained by former Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong in Parliament on 17 August 1999, as summarised below:
• The President's Office had requested a listing of physical assets from the Accountant-General on 18 Jun 1996. At a meeting with the President on 14 Aug 1996 (i.e. less than two months later), the Accountant-General provided a listing of State buildings, while the Commissioner of Lands provided a listing of State lands. Updates were subsequently sent to the President's Office.
• It was at this meeting that the President remarked that to protect the Past Reserves, the reserves should ideally be denominated in dollar value. To this, the Accountant-General said that it would take 56 man-years10 to conduct a complete valuation of the physical assets, even though he had already produced the listing (without valuation figures).
• The Attorney-General’s Chambers subsequently advised that there was no need to revalue all State properties at each changeover of the term of Government, as the question of whether Past Reserves were being drawn did not arise unless a piece of land was actually about to be sold off or alienated. At the point of sale, land is valued, and the Reserves protection framework requires only that the land be sold at fair market value.
• Furthermore, the proposed revaluation would be a waste of resources. First, the reality was that much of State land would remain as State land, i.e. unsold. Second, the value of each piece of land depended on planning and zoning restrictions, which  the Government could change.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Sub-standard PAP and the Singapore education system

I make a 'policy shift' when I hear the debate of right politics, constructive politics and sub-standard opposition. My original aim is to discuss about “Su Dongbo, Zhang Juzheng and Singapore education system”. The discussion will end with a sub-standard PAP, in particular from the assessment of the quality of PAP potential candidates. Another policy shift is to discuss it like a play, a drama and make it more entertainment rather than a sub-standard political discussion. Act 1 Gangster’s demand Imagine a sense in the Hong Kong's gangster movie (or a godfather movie), the gangsters' master is shouting at his poor opponent and demand him to give a price for his wrong act. The poor guy without any resources can only offer his body or his service to work for the master. Back in his own chamber, the master is still not satisfied and continues to shout 'don't play, play, you think you are hero, you think you are tiger, or superstar or acting

因为有比较, 才知道做得不够, 才明白什么叫做易通。

  因为有比较, 才知道做得不够, 才明白什么叫做易通。 如果只有一套解决方法,很难看出好坏,方便还是不方便,易通还是不容易通。用新方法代替旧的系统,人们当然会做比较,尤其是科技产品,使用的人很多,一用就马上看到结果。 这是一个竞争的世界,即使一党独大,也要考虑到便民。当人民觉得不方便,不好用,不易通,就会反映,发声,不满。为什么没有预先想到,最可怕的是测试时,已经接到反应,还是不加改善。或许,行动党还抱着“令伯”最大,用者自行解决问题。 易通公交收费系统的整合,似乎缺少一种人文,沟通,反而更加多表现出政府的独断独行。尤其重要的是,如果只有一套系统,我们是看不出问题,做不出好坏的评价。 这其实证明国会里不可以只有一把声音,没有比较,没有进步。

EBRC objectives: Stop “Out of Aljunied”, Stop SDP Breakthrough and “Negative-Asset” Ministers.

First of all, we have to congratulate the Electoral Boundaries Review Committee for creating more competitions, especially, multi-cornered competitions in the East. When making changes, EBRC aims to achieve 3 goals: To prevent “Out of Aljunied” for Workers’ Party.  This is the most important objective. To prevent Singapore Democratic Party making any breakthrough in the North and Central.   To look for a solution to retire “negative-asset” ministers or reduce PAP damages. From the reported claims from different political parties, we will expect multi-cornered contests not only in single constituencies but also in group representative constituencies. The PAP hopes to have a repeat of 2011 Presidential Election. Then Tony Tan won the Presidency when he got only 35% of the votes, a narrow win.However, a win is still a win. He did in even in the very last minute, after recounts of votes.    How to achieve multi-cornered contests? By inserting a single c