Are you ready for 7 million people on tiny Singapore?

[sleepy]

keroppi:

I think it is unfair to say that. We don't just work for the money, there's such a thing as job satisfaction, personal growth and interest. A lot of people like challenges too and derive a lot of satisfaction from problem solving and project delivery. In Maslow's hierarchy of needs, money probably ranks at the lower 3 tiers.

Precisely. With such a person (as described above) I seriously doubt he or she would take on for example a postman role even if he or she is being offered 30% more than his or her existing pay.

I'm not saying a postman job is less desirable but rather it's a different sort of challenge & job satisfaction to that person (as described above)

[3Boys]

sleepy:

3Boys:

If we are willing to work longer, it'll be easier for the g'ment to slow the inflow. And as we work older, we need to adjust to new realities and maybe swallow a bit of pride and take on less demanding roles for lower pay.

Just wait and see the howls of protests when the g'ment next increases retirement age to 67.

I'm not suggesting the existing retirement age to be increased further in the pretext of holding on to our cpf.

Why not? If CPF is withdrawn earlier, what's the incentive to go on working?

The point is that we need to go on being economically into our older years, or the whole economic model collapses. It's not a matter of working for fun to fill our time in old age, it's working like we do in our 40s and 50s.....because we need to.

Is that an unpalatable medicine that Singaporeans are willing to swallow?

[limlim]

3Boys:

......just so you know, be prepared to work longer, even WP says so.

Full speech here --> http://wp.sg/2013/02/a-dynamic-population-for-a-sustainable-singapore-reclaiming-back-singapore-mp-sylvia-lim/

And bringing in FTs isn't going to change that, isn't it?

The productive young foreign workforce isn't going to support local elders in the same way like the offsprings of local population.. ya? No one is going to come in and offer to look after your parents for you.

[WeiHan]

3Boys:

sleepy:

[quote=\"3Boys\"]
If we are willing to work longer, it'll be easier for the g'ment to slow the inflow. And as we work older, we need to adjust to new realities and maybe swallow a bit of pride and take on less demanding roles for lower pay.

Just wait and see the howls of protests when the g'ment next increases retirement age to 67.

I'm not suggesting the existing retirement age to be increased further in the pretext of holding on to our cpf.

Why not? If CPF is withdrawn earlier, what's the incentive to go on working?

The point is that we need to go on being economically into our older years, or the whole economic model collapses. It's not a matter of working for fun to fill our time in old age, it's working like we do in our 40s and 50s.....because we need to.

Is that an unpalatable medicine that Singaporeans are willing to swallow?[/quote]Aren't we already seeing old people picking cans and paper cartons at the rubbish trash? can't we get them better economic value added jobs?

[limlim]

3Boys:

PAP-haters, just so you know, WP is also advocating longer work-life.

I feel that working longer and extend CPF withdrawal is 2 different issue.

One can withdraw CPF and still continue to want to work.

[sleepy]

3Boys:

sleepy:

I'm not suggesting the existing retirement age to be increased further in the pretext of holding on to our cpf.

Why not? If CPF is withdrawn earlier, what's the incentive to go on working?

The point is that we need to go on being economically into our older years, or the whole economic model collapses. It's not a matter of working for fun to fill our time in old age, it's working like we do in our 40s and 50s.....because we need to.

Is that an unpalatable medicine that Singaporeans are willing to swallow?

Like kerropi mentioned earlier, the motivation to work beyond retirement age is because quote \"people like challenges too and derive a lot of satisfaction from problem solving and project delivery\"

Quote you \"being economically into our older years, .. it's working like we do in our 40s and 50s\" Yes, that is the model I'm talking about.

Recap what I said \"if a person is willing & capable, he or she can continue working beyond recommended retirement age. And neither employer nor gahmen should force a person to retire just because he or she hits retirement age.

Promotion & annual increment should be as per usual ie. based on performance. A person doesn't suddenly become less capable 1 day after his or her retirement age. Thus he or she should not be penalised & forced to settle for a lower pay or a lower level job.\"


Nobody is talking about working for fun to fill time :scratchhead:

[sleepy]

limlim:

3Boys:

PAP-haters, just so you know, WP is also advocating longer work-life.

I feel that working longer and extend CPF withdrawal is 2 different issue.

One can withdraw CPF and still continue to want to work.

Yes yes, that's what I'm talking about

[3Boys]

WeiHan:

3Boys:

[quote=\"sleepy\"]
Just wait and see the howls of protests when the g'ment next increases retirement age to 67.

I'm not suggesting the existing retirement age to be increased further in the pretext of holding on to our cpf.

Why not? If CPF is withdrawn earlier, what's the incentive to go on working?

The point is that we need to go on being economically into our older years, or the whole economic model collapses. It's not a matter of working for fun to fill our time in old age, it's working like we do in our 40s and 50s.....because we need to.

Is that an unpalatable medicine that Singaporeans are willing to swallow?[/quote]Aren't we already seeing old people picking cans and paper cartons at the rubbish trash? can't we get them better economic value added jobs?[/quote]

Oh Yah! How can I forget that fave pic of that old lady with a push cart and cardboard boxes.

What did you do today, WeiHan, to talk to that lady and see if you could help her? Do you know her circumstances, whether she has family that are financially stable and refuses to help her? Whether she has turned down MCYS assistance, or she has already taken MCYS assistance and wishes to continue with her sideline?

We can't get into a mature discussion about ageing workforce without that old cardboard box lady, yah?

Pray tell, what value added job can you find her? Just because you find that job demeaning, does not mean she feels the same way.

[Dreamaurora]

3Boys:

If we are willing to work longer, it'll be easier for the g'ment to slow the inflow. And as we work older, we need to adjust to new realities and maybe swallow a bit of pride and take on less demanding roles for lower pay.

Just wait and see the howls of protests when the g'ment next increases retirement age to 67.

3Boys, I understand where are you coming from, but we need to acknowledge that perhaps not all people share that view or are able to see the reasoning of your view. I myself would not want to retire, but I understand there are many elderly who just wish to take a good long rest and enjoy their retirement using their savings. I've known elderly who just wish to retire at their 50s but they are unable to withdraw their CPFs. Sure, we can expect them to 'work longer to slow the inflow', but is this what all elderly population wants?

MIW draft policies on the assumptions that the citizens will understand their line of thoughts i.e. '6.9 million population is for the benefit of Singaporeans'. It's kind of how some parents make unpopular decisions for their children on the assumptions that the decisions will benefit the children e.g. I want you to study medicine even if you don't like it because can earn lots of money. While I agree that sometimes hard decisions have to be made, it has to be accompanied with empathy for the people. I am not saying PAP should go full populist, but at least they need to show to people that they care.

Take for example the recent victory parades in PE, LLL and gang rode on a lorry and personally congratulate their supporters whereas KPK was perched on a double decker bus and out of reach of his supporters. It's small little thing like this that makes impact on the general population and PAP seems to be a little slow into catching up in their people skills. Like it or not, the vote of an HDB dwelling ITE grad is equal to that a high-paying CEO. At the end of the day, everyone has the same right to vote in the people they think will run the government best. PAP should engage their opponents and haters more instead of just ignoring and branding them as no inconsequence. As tempting as it is to brand those people in PAP Haters Den e.g. Eat Drink Man Woman forum as whiners, they are still fellow Singaporeans and their thoughts will influence their friends and relatives. Castigating them will only increase their abhorrence towards PAP.

[3Boys]

sleepy:

3Boys:

[quote=\"sleepy\"]

I'm not suggesting the existing retirement age to be increased further in the pretext of holding on to our cpf.

Why not? If CPF is withdrawn earlier, what's the incentive to go on working?

The point is that we need to go on being economically into our older years, or the whole economic model collapses. It's not a matter of working for fun to fill our time in old age, it's working like we do in our 40s and 50s.....because we need to.

Is that an unpalatable medicine that Singaporeans are willing to swallow?

Like kerropi mentioned earlier, the motivation to work beyond retirement age is because quote \"people like challenges too and derive a lot of satisfaction from problem solving and project delivery\"

Quote you \"being economically into our older years, .. it's working like we do in our 40s and 50s\" Yes, that is the model I'm talking about.

Recap what I said \"if a person is willing & capable, he or she can continue working beyond recommended retirement age. And neither employer nor gahmen should force a person to retire just because he or she hits retirement age.

Promotion & annual increment should be as per usual ie. based on performance. A person doesn't suddenly become less capable 1 day after his or her retirement age. Thus he or she should not be penalised & forced to settle for a lower pay or a lower level job.\"


Nobody is talking about working for fun to fill time :scratchhead:[/quote]Can't have your cake and eat it too.

You are talking about working older as an OPTION, in your first 2 paragraphs. I.e., only to fulfil higher order needs.

If you want to make that an option, then it must be an option for employers too. If you want to make rehiring of the elderly compulsory, then the flip side must apply, i.e. work till 67, then withdraw CPF.

That is the whole point. Otherwise, it is those that are most vulnerable (in low paying, unsatisfying jobs) that will quit and take their CPF early, and they will be ones that will run out of money.