否极泰来 Piji Tailai

  Time is bad as seen in the Acknowledgement of Unemployed benefits, Inequality and Mobility. In some ways, the government has openly acknowledged the serious problems of inequality and mobility.  They have to solve them before the next election.  Whether they can succeed in convincing Singaporeans is a critical winning factor.  What Lawrence Wong said recently can be seen as the preparations for the coming general election.  Inequality, mobility and help to unemployed persons are to be included in the Forward Singapore which will then be used during the election campaign.     Any guessing of early elections is meaningless until the political project of Forward Singapore is completed.  To be honest, when you look at the handouts and possible unemployment benefits to be given out, time is bad and maybe worse than expected.   The PAP thinks Forward Singapore can do a second Tharman effect. Voters who believe in Forward Singapore ...

  未来局势不明朗，不确定；金管局加强监管保险公司。保险回报、收入也会出现波动。 新加坡金融管理局，将对四家保险公司加强监管，就像监管银行那样严格监管它们的业务。英文媒体用 “大到不能倒” ，来形容这四家保险公司。因为，这些保险公司和银行一样，一旦倒闭，会对我国经济、民生造成严重影响。 从这点看，这显示 未来的经济走势，将会面对更大的风险，投资回报，收益，也将更加不确定和不明朗。 把保险公司也归入严格监管的范围，这似乎说明保险公司也不保险了。为了确保它们一旦面对困难，造成不良影响，金管局不得不出手强加管制。 金融体系不稳定，如雷曼兄弟倒闭，次贷风波，的确把美国和世界最大的保险公司AIG拉下，如果当时美国政府不出手相救，AIG保险公司将面临倒闭，对世界经济造成严重后果。 目前的国际经济、政治，都出现很多变数。我们已经不能利用过去的预算、估算来评论未来的保险回报，保单未必能够确保在售保书中答应过的回报率。我们很多保单都是根据欧美国家的表现，来评估回报。这些国家现在面临高利率，高失业率，甚至汇率不稳定的情形，这肯定会影响保单的回报。 金管局这么做，就是要避免血本无归的局面出现。如果真的出现倒闭问题，也能理出一个退出机制，确保保单的延续问题、善后问题。这个小动作，似乎不需要大惊小怪，但是，认真一想，所有与保险、保单有关的人，不能不重视。甚至，连公积金的退休回报也可能会受到影响。因为，不论储备还是公积金，投资地点也是这些国家和地区。 保险，银行，金融体系都是极为敏感的市场。一有什么风吹草动，发展速度和破坏性极高，或许，金管局已经预测到什么不利发展，而提前做好准备。就像前些时候，我们大量进口黄金一样。到底局势会如何发展，现在还很难看出什么，不过大家应该要有心理准备。未来几年，经济不明朗，局势不稳定将是一个常态，和以前有所不同。

  Higher Risk, Lower Return, Insurance Companies Are Under insured? What About Our Payouts? The recent announcement of four ‘too big to fail’ insurance companies in Singapore seems to suggest the insurance industry may face a difficult time ahead.  Most of our insurance money is invested in the West and managed by them and the highly possible downturn of their economies will result in higher risk and lower return. Higher capital requirements and more controls over them may prevent these insurance companies from going down.  But with reduced income and benefits distribution, less payouts from insurance products are possible.   With an increasing number of people, especially retirees, using insurance as annuity, or monthly payouts to supplement their CPF Life, if insurance companies cut their payouts, this will affect their ‘take home’ income.  For the same reason, the CPF Board can also use the same reason (higher risk, lower return) to reduce either interes...

  生活费用高涨，不关总统的事；但是，他又如何团结国人，渡过难关？ 总统选举证明国人只是关心总统如何保障储备和高官的任命，有关政策和治理国家，那是政府的工作。选民在投票时，是否期待考虑，总统也能协助国人，减轻生活压力，在互相敬重的背景下，团结国人。 新总统一上任，政府就宣布一系列的涨价，从水，车资，拥车证，再到连续不断的普通市民的消费，从小贩中心，超市，咖啡店，我们不难发现，物价上涨的压力。这其实强化、加深贫富悬殊，社会不平等，我们倒要看看，总统如何在困难时期，团结国人，还是像欧巴马那样，空喊口号。 在三位总统候选人中，只有陈钦亮最冠心普通人的生活开支，但是，他却是最不得人心的一位。黄国松只字不提生活费，他只关心投资、储备。尚达曼三言两语带过生活费用的问题。因此，有百分之八十以上的选民，不认为总统可以改变生活，这是政府的工作。总统只能鼓励国人，乐观向上，勇于面对挑战。这么呼吁，真的能够团结国人吗？ 这是不是一种互相矛盾的悖论。又要马儿好，有要马儿不吃草。又想尚达曼这么聪明的人做总统，但是，又没有给他武器工具改善人民的生活。又或许，明哲保身，洁身自爱的尚达曼，就是依样画葫芦，无心无力的做着样板戏，就像他的前几任那样。 现在，唯一能够反映民情，改善国人生活的方方面面，就只剩下大选了。有人预测，大选很快就来了。但是，也有人，告诫人民行动党，不要把总统优势当成大选的红利。无论如何，大选迟早一定到来，你准备好了吗?

  If S. Iswaran were an Opposition MP,  What would you expect? And what drama? Lucky or unlucky, what would you expect if Iswaran were an alternative member of parliament? Would the drama that you are currently watching be any different? Is there any difference if you are white, blue or red? From the past examples, even if you are not a member of parliament, the People’s Action Party will not treat you lightly once you are in trouble.  In Chinese, the same people have different fates or put in a simple term life is unfair.

  李光耀100年，可否预料到儿子会被告。 或许，这是一种‘大公无私“的进步？ 也或许是一种退步。李光耀在位，担任领导人的时候，控告对手诽谤，是他的一项专长。有些人被告到破产，有些自我流放，沦落他乡。一听到有人被告，大家都替他担心，认为凶多吉少，后果不堪设想。 既是进步，也是退步。连李显扬也被人告，这显示李家人人都可以成为被告。这说明新加坡的法制是公平的，即使贵为李家公子，也可能被提告。这是进步。不过，这真的是新加坡人要的进步吗？ 那么，退步又作何解？这60年来，新加坡人从害怕内安法，红帽子，发展到害怕说话不小心，被人提告诽谤。 100年的李光耀，新加坡还是无法摆脱政治上的诽谤案。 不但，诽谤没有消失， 虚假新闻，更正指示 却成了新的潮流、新手段。 诽谤作为政治手段，它的继续存在，并且还与时并进，发扬光大，我们应该定义它为进步还是退步。难道，我们没有更好的选择吗？如果更正指示是最新，更好的选择，那么，它到底是进步还是退步？还是，它化身成为温和版的诽谤工具，利用花蝴蝶版的政府立场、声明来压制政府不想让人看到的另一面。 进步的同时，也在退步？李光耀100年，他的精神、手段，作风，要如何融合未来的新加坡。60年前的奋斗、艰辛岁月，年轻一代会如何看待李光耀的相关性，适用性，以及它的实用性？

  Win 100%, Lose 85.71%. Who really wins in the case of a shophouse lawsuit?  A win is not a win. A loss is not a loss.  There is no winner who takes all the benefits.  When reading news, we need to compare and know the details. The headlines can be misleading.   In the case of ex-MP Chiang Hai Ding’s shophouse lawsuit, news reports may give you a confusing answer.  If you read Today, the headline seems to suggest Chiang wins. The Straits Times gave another picture, winning the case may not necessarily be the final winner.  Same for 8world and Zaobao.  The key is the benefit distribution of the shophouse.  The win means the property 100% belongs to Chiang.  However, due to contributions from Chiang’s son and daughter in law, 85.71% of the benefit belonged to his son.  This has to be considered in the divorce proceeds between son and daughter in law. 100% win is really not a 100% win.  For the loser, it is also not a 100% l...