atans1

Why CPF annuity will begin at 75

In CPF on 02/06/2018 at 11:05 am

Trumpets pls. Sometime back I wrote Why CPF annuity will begin at 75? (Piece is reproduced below)

Well now

A tripartite workgroup will be set up to relook the Central Provident Fund (CPF) contribution rates for older workers and study the “relevance of retirement and re-employment age”, Manpower Minister Josephine Teo announced on Monday (May 28).

Speaking at the Ministry of Manpower’s annual workplan seminar, Mrs Teo — who took over the manpower portfolio this month — said the new Tripartite Workgroup on Older Workers will also look into ensuring fair treatment of mature employees at the workplace.

https://www.todayonline.com/singapore/cpf-contribution-rates-older-workers-relevance-retirement-age-be-reviewed-josephine-teo

Emphasis mine

Why CPF annuity will begin at 75?

By the early 2000s the state of health of American men aged 69, as reported by themselves, was as good as that of 60-year-olds in the 1970s; 70 really does seem to be the new 60.

Economist

So if liddat can work until 75 meh?

So if the PAP wants to raise the age when we can get our CPF annuities, it can quote the BBC and the Economist, its bible of Hard Truths for intellectual support.

In 1948 the average 65-year-old could expect to live 13.5 years.

People retiring now can expect to live much longer – 22.8 years.

If the trend continues as expected, today’s young people can expect to live into their early nineties.

Imagine the amount of money you spend on a pension is a pot of jam. Either you spread it far more thinly in future over more years – meaning a lower annual pension – or you are going to need a much bigger pot.

BBC

And

The Oxford English dictionary defines “old” as “having lived for a long time”. It illustrates the sense with an accompanying phrase, “the old man lay propped up on cushions”: the old person as one who has made all the useful contributions he can possibly make to society and is now at rest. When pensions were first introduced in Prussia, in the 1880s, this was probably a fair characterisation for anyone over 65. Not many people lived beyond this age; those who did were rarely in good health. But today many 65-year-olds are healthy and active. Donald Trump (71) may be many things, but old he is not, nor for that matter is Vladimir Putin (64), who qualifies for his bus pass in October. Yet governments and employers still treat 65 as a cliff’s edge beyond which people can be regarded as “old”: inactive, and an economic burden.

This is wrong, for three reasons. First, what “old” means is relative. Life expectancy has gone through the roof since Otto von Bismarck pioneered the Prussian welfare state. Today the average 65-year-old German can expect to live another 20 years. So can most people in other rich countries, meaning old age now arguably kicks in later than before. Second, the term carries an underlying implication about health, or at least fitness. But healthy-life expectancy has grown roughly in tandem with life expectancy; for many, 70 really is the new 60. Third, surveys show that the majority of younger over-65-year-olds increasingly want to stay actively involved in their communities and economies. Few want to retire in the literal sense of the word, which implies withdrawing from society as a whole. Many want to continue working but on different terms than before, asking for more flexibility and fewer hours.

https://www.economist.com/blogs/economist-explains/2017/07/economist-explains-7

Advertisements
  1. Unlike Singapore, govt run pension is the not the only source of retirement income for most Brits. If can’t smell the state pension for another few more years, there are also benefits.

  2. I have often commented previously that CPF payout date is tied to official retirement age (previously) and now the “re-employment age” (currently).

    Hence when govt recently increased the re-employment legislation from 65 to 67, I commented that PAPies will up the CPF payout age commensurately, sooner rather than later. But it will be a bitter political pill to swallow, and like the GST increase, will probably be done after next GE.

    PAPies will “explain” to give the increased re-employment age more time for employers & workers to adapt & adopt.

    PAPies philosophy when it comes to retirement inadequacy is to continue working. Even if a former director has to downgrade to drive Grab or become a security guard. PAPies recognize this & so they try to augment with “income support” like Workfare and minimum contractual wage for cleaners, security guards etc.

    PAPies are very cognizant of issues of old age poverty, sandwiched generation & shrinking working sinkies to support oldies; hence all sorts of schemes like HDB lease buyback, incentives for downgrading to studio flats, relatively liberal rules for renting out HDB etc.

    Just as free market prices rise to a level which the market can bear, so too PAPies will squeeze financial support for oldies to as low a level as the election polls can bear.

  3. PS: In case you didn’t know, the DEFAULT CPF Life payout age is now 70.

    This is in the event you don’t get back to CPF before your 65th birthday.

    I think this policy started (silently) in 2017.

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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: