CPF was "100 per cent safe''

(24-06-2014, 11:06 AM)corydorus Wrote: I realise people has the tendency to gang up with all opposing ideas for the sake of opposing and blurring the lines of objections. Let's focus issue objectively rather than against specific party. We are dealing with life issue here and is not a game of ego or fun.

The very people who you like to try to push to get access to the fund early, are you game enough to up your social responsibility as they will likely needs more later since their CPF has been "routed". Are this people accountable to their own financial well being or living beyond their means ? No doubt there is special exception cases that needs help but should the CPF be the battle ground for this needs ?

Agree that the problem now with internet is lack of accountability. From advising teenagers on adolescence to resolving comlpex family issues, we give comments without a clear understanding of the consequences. IMHO sooner or later people will pay more for objective non-bias credible news-source than blogs or opinions.

Therein lies the crux of Roy vs LHL

It is heuristic that we will form an opinion or action on what little info that we have or tendancies we have. That is why when we buy a stock we sometimes fall in love and every news can be construed as good news or worst case wait and see. Once we sell the stock, all the newsflows are construed negative. This is something that rational investors have to guard against and also in our understanding of the bigger socio-political issues

I have to guard myself against being too biased (exaggerated: falling in love) with your opinion. Merely because your opinions are generally far more right than not. Joke aside. Good quality pieces there, Specuvestor & Corydorus. Thanks for sharing.

I guard myself always with this saying by Keynes : "When the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do Sir?"

The trick is in finding out the facts and filtering out baseless opinions. There is a fine line between opinions and accusations: I think the corp governance of the company is bad, vs I think the directors are swindlers

That's why Munger recommends a multi-disciplinary approach to establish facts and solutions. Ironically internet which is full of opinions and baseless remarks is a very good tool for multi-disciplinary approach.

(24-06-2014, 11:06 AM)corydorus Wrote: I realise people has the tendency to gang up with all opposing ideas for the sake of opposing and blurring the lines of objections. Let's focus issue objectively rather than against specific party. We are dealing with life issue here and is not a game of ego or fun.

The very people who you like to try to push to get access to the fund early, are you game enough to up your social responsibility as they will likely needs more later since their CPF has been "routed". Are this people accountable to their own financial well being or living beyond their means ? No doubt there is special exception cases that needs help but should the CPF be the battle ground for this needs ?

Why do we need to up our social responsibility towards these people?

Some of them want to take out some money to tide their family over a rough patch or to sponsor their kids' private education. When we do not let them use their CPF money, we already won't hold ourselves responsible due to their missed opportunities or for their financial hardship while they struggle without help from their locked-up CPF money.

So, if they use up their money early and need more money, why do we need to be responsible for them?

In any case, are we being responsible towards them now? When you see an old man in frail health cleaning toilets for long hours for a pittance, do you feel any social responsibility for him? Or you simply just move on.

Life is like that. Our society already makes it clear that it is every man for himself. Given such a mentality, I really hate to see what would happen should war break out. I wonder how many Singaporeans would stay and fight. But that is for a different thread.

As Munger always says "Invert, always invert"

In other words, we are forcing some group of people to the corners at 55 now (maybe the road of no return) and still tell them it's for their own good their CPF is for their retirement in future at 62 or 65.
I just wonder what is the % of this group of people? i think the % will increase very fast as our MS and cost of living increase very fast now.

(24-06-2014, 03:03 PM)specuvestor Wrote: I guard myself always with this saying by Keynes : "When the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do Sir?"

The trick is in finding out the facts and filtering out baseless opinions. There is a fine line between opinions and accusations: I think the corp governance of the company is bad, vs I think the directors are swindlers

That's why Munger recommends a multi-disciplinary approach to establish facts and solutions. Ironically internet which is full of opinions and baseless remarks is a very good tool for multi-disciplinary approach.

Before the Internet arrives, one of the way to touch the ground is to talk with people in coffee shops. Same trick was required on the coffee shop talks.

I am using a "jigsaw" approach, which should be quite similar with Munger "multi-disciplinary" approach.

(24-06-2014, 03:35 PM)CityFarmer Wrote:

(24-06-2014, 03:03 PM)specuvestor Wrote: I guard myself always with this saying by Keynes : "When the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do Sir?"

The trick is in finding out the facts and filtering out baseless opinions. There is a fine line between opinions and accusations: I think the corp governance of the company is bad, vs I think the directors are swindlers

That's why Munger recommends a multi-disciplinary approach to establish facts and solutions. Ironically internet which is full of opinions and baseless remarks is a very good tool for multi-disciplinary approach.

Before the Internet arrives, one of the way to touch the ground is to talk with people in coffee shops. Same trick was required on the coffee shop talks.

I am using a "jigsaw" approach, which should be quite similar with Munger "multi-disciplinary" approach.

If my memory doesn't fail me, Multi-disciplinary refers to the collaboration between multiple disciplinary (or rather the liberal arts).
Eg: Economic & Psychology to debunk the Market Efficiency Theory.

The gathering of the information (and facts) is more of the form of the latticework.
The latticework is formed and used to tackle the problem from multiple fronts (of course using invert, invert and always invert)

(24-06-2014, 04:05 PM)ksir Wrote:

(24-06-2014, 03:35 PM)CityFarmer Wrote:

(24-06-2014, 03:03 PM)specuvestor Wrote: I guard myself always with this saying by Keynes : "When the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do Sir?"

The trick is in finding out the facts and filtering out baseless opinions. There is a fine line between opinions and accusations: I think the corp governance of the company is bad, vs I think the directors are swindlers

That's why Munger recommends a multi-disciplinary approach to establish facts and solutions. Ironically internet which is full of opinions and baseless remarks is a very good tool for multi-disciplinary approach.

Before the Internet arrives, one of the way to touch the ground is to talk with people in coffee shops. Same trick was required on the coffee shop talks.

I am using a "jigsaw" approach, which should be quite similar with Munger "multi-disciplinary" approach.

If my memory doesn't fail me, Multi-disciplinary refers to the collaboration between multiple disciplinary (or rather the liberal arts).
Eg: Economic & Psychology to debunk the Market Efficiency Theory.

The gathering of the information (and facts) is more of the form of the latticework.
The latticework is formed and used to tackle the problem from multiple fronts (of course using invert, invert and always invert)

The "jigsaw" approach is to building up a picture (a fact), by one piece at a time. The pieces are not only from a source (discipline), but multiple different sources (multiple disciplines).

It is rare we can "see" the picture by the very first piece of puzzle, and most of the time, not even after multiple pieces are in place. With experience, it is possible to guess the picture, with reasonably accuracy, after only few carefully selected key pieces (from different source) are put in place.

I like puzzle, and I will encourage my kid to love it

While foreigners can withdraw all their money out from CPF once they leave Singapore, locals have no recourse.
Is this a perk for foreigners working here?