Bloomberg agreed with Roy in 2014

In CPF, GIC on 26/03/2016 at 1:00 pm

[Update on 27 March at 6.20am: A reader has given the new link so I’ve amended the article accordingly. ]

We know that Roy Ngerng talks cock about GIC managing CPF monies. Govt says so and so do independent experts like Chris K (once a TRE:and super hero and financial gguru, now demoted to PAP IB member).

But this is what Bloomberg wrote in 2014 when Roy was KPKBing about PM stealing our CPF monies

Like investors of all stripes, GIC is fighting against the tide of slowing global growth and low interest rates.

The city-state’s citizen population of 3.3 million is aging fast; the median age will rise to 47 years by 2030 from 39 in 2011, according to the government’s National Population and Talent Division

What’s more, GIC is under demographic pressure as manager of part of the Central Provident Fund, the savings plan that is meant to provide retirement income for Singaporeans.

Now this is the strange thing. The link to the article  goes somewhere else, not to the article. Wonder why?


  1. The link is here:-

    GIC doesn’t so much manages CPF monies as utilises it. Pretty much how a company utilises loans to expand its businesses. Question is whether the “bank” i.e. sinkie/pr workers are getting fair long-term interest payments from GIC (& other utilisers), and whether the “bank’s fiduciary advisor CPF” has been advocating strongly enough for the bank’s benefit.

  2. CI morphed into bona fide Roy Ngerng fanboy izzit? Suspect the link is broken becos the Bloomberg article was just as rubbishy and may have been pulled. Reason whoever wrote that article must have been a Roy Ngerng doppelganger.

    The fundamental error is that if there is demograhic pressure, it is on CPF not GIC. And there is in reality no demographic pressure because the government controls the interest rates paid by CPF. Furthermore, there is no demographic pressure because CPF is not a pay as you go tax-funded social security system. So there is no stress from having fewer young in work citizens supporting more out of work retired citizens.

    The Bloomberg writer is talking cock.

  3. But this demographic pressure hogwash is being used by the government to scare half, non thinking Singaporeans in the same way it uses the European debt crisis to scare us about social expenditures.

    As to whether GIC manages CPF monies, I made the point that GIC is in the same position as I was when gainfully employed. As a fund manager, it is immaterial to me whether the monies received are from mom, pop or kids. All I see is a sum of money coming into the common assets and liabilities pool. As for GIC, it is even one further step removed because the monies received are not legally speaking CPF monies anymore but debt proceeds lumped together with other debt proceeds (from issue of standard government bonds). These debt proceeds are lumped together with other government cashflows, funds and endowments, all of which are mandated to GIC to manage. Note the monies do not leave the government – the relation with GIC is the relation between a managed fund and an asset manager. GIC is unable to say if 1million invested in Unilever equity consist 500k of CPF monies, 300k in proceeds of SGS debt issuance and 200k of endowments in the same way as DBS cannot say $50k car loan given to Tan Ah Huat consist of $10k from Ahmad, $25k from Selva and $15k from Jimmy. This is something not understood even by the duds who wrote the explanation in the MOF website.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: