CPF savings 'may not be enough for old age'

In the stock market,
many of them are impatient.
some of them are patient.
only a small group are very patient. And this is the group that earns above market return .

I have heard some fren told me they earn >10%, 30% even 100%. But 100% base on what percentage of your investible cash? If one is using only 10% of investible cash and earn 100%, i think its still peanuts.

To me only:-
Our CPF's albeit Papaya's policies generally almost reflect the saying:-
"Every man for himself (and the devil take the hindmost)."
Or "Meritocracy practise to its limit".


Quote:- "The poor will always be with us".
My sympathy to those who can't catch up.
Have a heart if you are more successful than others.

Patience:
For some are blessed with "patience"(caution) in whatever they want to do. But believe me "patience" can be continuously cultivated as you manage to survive in the stock market. As the years go by, you will be more and more patient in the market by practice and maybe as you aged, you are more and more wiser through experience, hopefully. Your fingers no more so itchy anymore.

> I have heard some fren told me they earn >10%, 30% even 100%. But 100% base on what
> percentage of your investible cash? If one is using only 10% of investible cash and earn 100%

CPF amount for investment, there is a limit. I am saying % return based on the amount I bought for a stock.

SRS - All 100% is invested. The dividends come in, I find chance to deploy again... if it make sense.

> 3) Not until you can manage your emotions, you can manage your money.

That is absolutely correct.
The other half. Must know what the business / stock is worth. Then buy when cheap.

Exactly the same as buying bargains on groupon or deal.com

d.o.g. Wrote:In my personal view, new flat prices should be indexed to income, so that prices rise and fall automatically with general income levels, instead of merely being studied, debated and occasionally adjusted. In this way, increased prosperity will still result in rising prices, so that owners can still benefit, but because prices are indexed to income, the new flats will remain affordable to first-time buyers.

Hi d.o.g.,

A proposal similar to yours has been proposed in the past. If the ex-Housing Minister were still around, I am sorry to inform you that you will be accused of raiding our nation's hard-earned accumulated reserves.

http://www.straitstimes.com/GeneralElect...59136.html

http://mrwangsaysso.blogspot.com/2011/04...nting.html

Singaporeans can see that the new Housing Minister is trying his best to provide a roof for young couples. Perhaps there will be a change of position now.

How do you calculate return. There seems to be so many ways.

Do you do a simple calculation such as this :

Dividends + unrealized gain/loss + realized gains/loss divided by total invested cost = return for year

How about over 5 yrs?

Thank you.

I am the lazy type.

Annual return = (End of the year net investible assets - Beginning of the year net investible assets) /Beginning of the year net investible assets

net investible assets = stocks(market valuation) + cash.
So, basically, I will capture all realized gains/losses, dividends, salary and unrealized gains/losses.

The idle cash will affect the return quite significantly since the return is pathetic.

You can get the discontinued "MicroSoft Money software from the Internet. it is FOC now. i use it since 23+ years ago. It can track almost everything. Of course your data input must be appropriate. Every financial software will be the same in one sense----GIGO. Ha! Ha!

> Personally, I do not believe that above market gain can be achieved by all. If every investors and traders are doing the same as what you are doing, it will
> basically reduce your gains.
> In the stock market, many of them lose money. some of them achieve market return. a small group gets above market return.

I was fortunate to learn from a group of investors, learn from mistakes, and stay rational.

1. STOCKS = BUSINESS + MGT + PRICE.
Any 1 not good, pass.

2. Control emotion

3. Go against crowd behaviour

You have been in this forum long enough... should not have a problem...

(29-02-2012, 09:17 PM)Contrarian Wrote: > Personally, I do not believe that above market gain can be achieved by all. If every investors and traders are doing the same as what you are doing, it will
> basically reduce your gains.
> In the stock market, many of them lose money. some of them achieve market return. a small group gets above market return.

I was fortunate to learn from a group of investors, learn from mistakes, and stay rational.

1. STOCKS = BUSINESS + MGT + PRICE.
Any 1 not good, pass.

2. Control emotion

3. Go against crowd behaviour

You have been in this forum long enough... should not have a problem...

Everything is important, but the most important is the price you paid. Fair price is not good enough. There should be a margin of safety for the purchased price.You normally have margin of safety purchased price only in a severe Bear Market. At any other time of the Market, if you still insist on participating, you may be fortunate to spot a fair price for a purchase. Very rarely can you spot a margin of safety purchase in "normal" market.
No?
But the beauty of the Market is your margin of safety price may be different from me. i hope not much different. If it is, there is something wrong somewhere. Ha! Ha!

(29-02-2012, 09:47 AM)d.o.g. Wrote:

yeokiwi Wrote:But most importantly, the cost of living that can be controlled internally must be controlled!(properties' prices, transport costs, educational costs and taxes).

Hear, hear. I continued to be amazed at Singapore Government English where HDB subsidy means "discount from market" instead of "at or below cost". It is painfully obvious that housing is the single biggest expenditure of most citizens' lives. Yet the government refuses to acknowledge that its "household asset" policy has merely transferred wealth from future generations to the present i.e. current homeowners' prosperity is derived from the impoverishment of future homeowners who have to overpay relative to their income.

The amount of money the average person can earn in a lifetime is limited (short of being an entrepreneur, senior manager in a huge company, or a Member of Parliament). Therefore if the person is to have more to live on in old age, he/she must spend less during the working years. The obvious target for reduction is the mortgage.

I have made the suggestion elsewhere in this forum before that one of the big reasons for expensive housing is the policy of allowing one to use their CPF savings to pay for housing!! That is the primary policy error of the government but which is almost impossible to reverse now due to entrenched interests.

Think of how ironic and circular this is. People claim CPF is not enough for retirement, yet go on to maximize their CPF usage to buy the biggest house(s) they can get because it doesn't cut into their free cash flow so they don't feel the pain (not realizing this is deferring the pain). Access to CPF savings for housing simply encourages asset inflation by stoking demand.

It would be politically unpopular, but it would work. Simply reduce the percentage of CPF available for housing (perhaps incrementally over the years). Voila, more savings in CPF, housing prices will moderate or fall.

---

(29-02-2012, 09:47 AM)d.o.g. Wrote: It is not that I think HDB flats should cost $10,000 forever. But if the aim of the HDB is provide affordable public housing then the principle behind pricing has to be rethought. In my personal view, new flat prices should be indexed to income, so that prices rise and fall automatically with general income levels, instead of merely being studied, debated and occasionally adjusted. In this way, increased prosperity will still result in rising prices, so that owners can still benefit, but because prices are indexed to income, the new flats will remain affordable to first-time buyers.

Unless you force the house owner to stay in his cheap housing forever or forbid him from selling his flat on the open market, giving him cheap housing is equivalent to giving him (deferred) money. That's because he can sell at market price at a later time.

I've already alluded to the possibility of reducing CPF usage for housing to cut demand, ameliorating housing prices.

Here's another (radical) suggestion that I've also made before, give every Singapore citizen a cash grant to buy any housing of his choice, but sell HDB flats at market prices or exit the housing market for the middle class and up. Continue to provide really cheap and basic housing (2/3 room flats) for the truly low income.