my cpf wish for retirement 0 posts
Reply to topic .leetahsar
14 posts since Sep '07
Send Message .21 Dec `10, 10:56AM
Reply/Quote edit .got this in my email:
Info Update
Our last email update reported that CPF had won the prestigious Stockholm Challenge 2010 Award for Public Administration, and was the first Singapore government agency to win such an award, when it was the only Singapore government agency to win this year. We are sorry for the error.
Last Chance for My Golden Egg Draw
Have you figured out how much you need for your retirement? Pen your retirement wish now! This is your last chance to win an iPad in our Grand Draw. Contest ends 31 December 2010.
P/S Look out for our next email blast where we'll tell you more about the benefits of the CPF Minimum Sum (MS) Topping-Up Scheme!
Yours faithfully
CPF Board
so i penned my retirement wish:
i wish by 55 yo i would get back ALL my cpf savings even though it might be that much. i wish the gov doesn't raise the withdrawal age. i m confused whether i could draw out ALL my $ at 55 or is it 60...or 62...or 65....or shit!! even older :(
i ve been conned into a dunno what ELDERSHIELD which i ve no idea what the hell it's all about and how the hell and when i first signed it. a check with my friends revealed that if i bo chap about that years back, i was already conned into it. IT WAS A OPT OUT major con job which i wasn't aware :((
cpf keeps sending me increased cost for this con the eldershit plan. i can't terminate cos it was already been there so many years which means my meagre interests accrued every year goes to pay for this dunno what shield scheme which i m totally helpless and dunno what to do.
so my wish is very simple: I WISH I COULD GET BACK ALL MY CPF SAVING WHEN I REACH 55 YO. wasn't that the original game rule - withdraw in FULL when we reach 55??
by the way, i think there is a prize for the best RETIREMENT WISH. what irony!! cpf also has CONtests.
.
Monday, December 20, 2010
Tuesday, December 7, 2010
emptiness is form, form is emptiness.....
Found this article which was posted on the Buddhist Channel.
More Moral Integrity Please
by Vajrakumara, The Buddhist Channel, Dec 6, 2010
Singapore -- A 'monk' who is an 'abbot' made grave mistakes. He has yet to express clear and open repentance for his multiple misgivings, even after being jailed. Most Buddhists are enraged at why the local Buddhist federation is not disciplining him - e.g. by defrocking him or demoting his monastic status.
Some Buddhists support him, saying he had paid his dues. But how about paying the Buddhist community affected by his shamelessness with a sincere apology in word and deed?
No, he agrees to attend an extravagant $200,000 dinner to 'honour' him by his devotees instead, when the money can go to the charity whose trust he seriously damaged. What is worth honouring anyway? The senior monks, including the one who ordained him refuse to comment. This is the summary of the situation so far.
While the 'monk' seems to lack the moral integrity to apologise, it is uncertain that the federation has power to trial the 'monk' because of it is not truly a central Buddhist body authorised by the Buddhist community to look after all matters of monastic discipline. In fact, it is questionable if the federation has enough moral integrity to judge him too.
For example, please see these articles on the serious mishandling of a recent international incident - 'Singapore's Minster did NOT Meet the Panchen Lama' (http://www.buddhistchannel.tv/index.php?id=22,9581,0,0,1,0) and 'Please Do Not Mix Religion & Politics' (http://www.buddhistchannel.tv/index.php?id=22,9582,0,0,1,0).
The federation itself has not yet apologised on this matter - of endorsing a puppet 'monk', which indirectly supports keeping the real one a political prisoner.
Back to the case of the unrepentant 'monk', it seems that all the key monks involved are at fault to some extent. Correctional action is wanting on all sides. What is the protagonist doing, by not apologising?
What is his teacher doing, by not openly demanding him to apologise publicly? What are his devotees doing, by feeding the 'monk' with undeserved honour? What is the federation doing, by not pulling up its socks of respectability by doing what is right and needed? (If it cannot defrock or demote the 'monk', he should simply be publicly denounced - to shame him appropriately as a last resort - to wake him up.)
What are the other apathetic monastics and laypeople doing, by remaining silent on this? If Buddhists do not care for the integrity of their community, who will? We will only be a laughing stock to non-Buddhists. The Buddha is unlikely to smile at this.
his good deeds are his bad deeds, his bad deeds are also his good deeds.... many see the bad in the monk while others see the good. whatever it is, is none of our business. it's his karma and he alone shall face the effect for the cause he has sown.
now what would be that "effect"? again, it's none of our business. but hell!! we are so kay poh to know!! :(
More Moral Integrity Please
by Vajrakumara, The Buddhist Channel, Dec 6, 2010
Singapore -- A 'monk' who is an 'abbot' made grave mistakes. He has yet to express clear and open repentance for his multiple misgivings, even after being jailed. Most Buddhists are enraged at why the local Buddhist federation is not disciplining him - e.g. by defrocking him or demoting his monastic status.
Some Buddhists support him, saying he had paid his dues. But how about paying the Buddhist community affected by his shamelessness with a sincere apology in word and deed?
No, he agrees to attend an extravagant $200,000 dinner to 'honour' him by his devotees instead, when the money can go to the charity whose trust he seriously damaged. What is worth honouring anyway? The senior monks, including the one who ordained him refuse to comment. This is the summary of the situation so far.
While the 'monk' seems to lack the moral integrity to apologise, it is uncertain that the federation has power to trial the 'monk' because of it is not truly a central Buddhist body authorised by the Buddhist community to look after all matters of monastic discipline. In fact, it is questionable if the federation has enough moral integrity to judge him too.
For example, please see these articles on the serious mishandling of a recent international incident - 'Singapore's Minster did NOT Meet the Panchen Lama' (http://www.buddhistchannel.tv/index.php?id=22,9581,0,0,1,0) and 'Please Do Not Mix Religion & Politics' (http://www.buddhistchannel.tv/index.php?id=22,9582,0,0,1,0).
The federation itself has not yet apologised on this matter - of endorsing a puppet 'monk', which indirectly supports keeping the real one a political prisoner.
Back to the case of the unrepentant 'monk', it seems that all the key monks involved are at fault to some extent. Correctional action is wanting on all sides. What is the protagonist doing, by not apologising?
What is his teacher doing, by not openly demanding him to apologise publicly? What are his devotees doing, by feeding the 'monk' with undeserved honour? What is the federation doing, by not pulling up its socks of respectability by doing what is right and needed? (If it cannot defrock or demote the 'monk', he should simply be publicly denounced - to shame him appropriately as a last resort - to wake him up.)
What are the other apathetic monastics and laypeople doing, by remaining silent on this? If Buddhists do not care for the integrity of their community, who will? We will only be a laughing stock to non-Buddhists. The Buddha is unlikely to smile at this.
his good deeds are his bad deeds, his bad deeds are also his good deeds.... many see the bad in the monk while others see the good. whatever it is, is none of our business. it's his karma and he alone shall face the effect for the cause he has sown.
now what would be that "effect"? again, it's none of our business. but hell!! we are so kay poh to know!! :(
Saturday, December 4, 2010
Thursday, December 2, 2010
could i also be a rich MONK?
MIN YIN or goh kah heng is in the limelight again and all for the wrong kind of news :(
#1 Today, 02:04 PM
Nomad
Alfrescian Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 664
My Reputation:Points: 174 / Power: 3
Ming Yi under fire again for $200,000 gala dinner
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Quote:
By Kai Fong – December 2nd, 2010
Email Facebook Twitter Print
Venerable Ming Yi
Barely three months after his release from prison, Reverend Ming Yi is embroiled in a fresh controversy, this time regarding a ceremonial dinner reported to have cost $200,000.
Organised by the Foo Hai Chan Monastery in Geylang, the $1,000-a-table dinner at the Pan Pacific Hotel was held on Nov 21 to mark Venerable Ming Yi’s 20 years of service as abbot of the temple.
The gala dinner has sparked off an emotional debate among Buddhists, reported The Straits Times.
Devotees of the said monastery called the celebration a sheng zuo dian li, or “rise to the power ceremony”; they said they wanted to celebrate Ven Ming Yi’s return to the temple.
But detractors asked if it was appropriate for the monk to turn the spotlight on himself — and so soon after his release from prison in September.
In addition, monastery records show that the 48-year-old monk’s 20th year of service comes about only in 2012.
Mr Lim Bock Guan, head of the Singapore Buddhist Lodge, told the same paper he had never heard of a monk being honoured for his service with a $1,000-a-table dinner in a top hotel.
The dinner was attended by monks from Malaysia and Hong Kong, but senior Buddhists in Singapore were noticeably absent although they had been invited.
The Buddhist Federation, the top Buddhist authority in Singapore, now wants Ming Yi to step forward and be judged by his fellow monks for crimes that landed him in jail earlier this year. Last October, the former head of Ren Ci was convicted of charges that included falsifying accounts and misappropriating funds.
For this to happen, though, Ming Yi has to step up voluntarily.
If he does, a disciplinary committee will be set up. It will be the first time that the Buddhist community here will have a panel of monks in a position to demote or defrock one of their own.
When asked for thoughts of the federation’s move, the chief disciple of Ven Wu Feng, the monk who had presided over Ming Yi’s ordination in 1984, said it was unlikely that Ming Yi would turn himself in, although “it is what he should do.”
“He’s climbed too far up, and now he has a long way to fall,” said the nun who declined to be named.
knn,$200K,can feed a lot of those patient at Ren Ci Hospital for quite awhile.
not fit to be a monk.
from another forum 3in1 kopitiam:
From: bratsalive 3:11 am
To: Sikodolauka unread (5 of 14)
41767.5 in reply to 41767.3
isn't it sad that the money was lavished and wasted in such a redundant ceremony when it could have been used more constructively?
according to the press, only by 2012 would min yi have served 20yrs. to celebrate his 20 yrs anniversary is already an exaggeration. yet as a monk, he proceeded instead of humbly disagreed to it. why?
according to the buddhist order, min yi has already breached all the 4 GRAVE OFFENCES: taking of life, theft, lust and falsehood.
taking of life: wastage of the money which could have used to save lives as in charitable purposes.
theft: how could a monk be owning so many condos, credit cars, cars and etc. what happened to his vow of denoucement of materialism?
lust: his obssession with raymond yeung and others remain dubious which had sowed the suffering to his present predicament.
falsehood: abet all that had happened, reported and convicted, he is now back into the limelight instead of doing much soul searching and repentance.
dynamic of buddhism is to reap what one sows. whatever min yi was and is sowing is really detrimental to his own effect and also others' perception and faith in buddhism and hence created a bad name for it if nothing is being done to correct this rogue.
people might in the end shun buddhism or be adversely disappointed by it if their belief and faith in buddhism is not firm or correct.
for this, the following applies:
BELIEVE IN THE FAITH OF THE RELIGION BUT NOT IN THE FAITH OF THE ONE WHO PREACHES IT.
#1 Today, 02:04 PM
Nomad
Alfrescian Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 664
My Reputation:Points: 174 / Power: 3
Ming Yi under fire again for $200,000 gala dinner
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Quote:
By Kai Fong – December 2nd, 2010
Email Facebook Twitter Print
Venerable Ming Yi
Barely three months after his release from prison, Reverend Ming Yi is embroiled in a fresh controversy, this time regarding a ceremonial dinner reported to have cost $200,000.
Organised by the Foo Hai Chan Monastery in Geylang, the $1,000-a-table dinner at the Pan Pacific Hotel was held on Nov 21 to mark Venerable Ming Yi’s 20 years of service as abbot of the temple.
The gala dinner has sparked off an emotional debate among Buddhists, reported The Straits Times.
Devotees of the said monastery called the celebration a sheng zuo dian li, or “rise to the power ceremony”; they said they wanted to celebrate Ven Ming Yi’s return to the temple.
But detractors asked if it was appropriate for the monk to turn the spotlight on himself — and so soon after his release from prison in September.
In addition, monastery records show that the 48-year-old monk’s 20th year of service comes about only in 2012.
Mr Lim Bock Guan, head of the Singapore Buddhist Lodge, told the same paper he had never heard of a monk being honoured for his service with a $1,000-a-table dinner in a top hotel.
The dinner was attended by monks from Malaysia and Hong Kong, but senior Buddhists in Singapore were noticeably absent although they had been invited.
The Buddhist Federation, the top Buddhist authority in Singapore, now wants Ming Yi to step forward and be judged by his fellow monks for crimes that landed him in jail earlier this year. Last October, the former head of Ren Ci was convicted of charges that included falsifying accounts and misappropriating funds.
For this to happen, though, Ming Yi has to step up voluntarily.
If he does, a disciplinary committee will be set up. It will be the first time that the Buddhist community here will have a panel of monks in a position to demote or defrock one of their own.
When asked for thoughts of the federation’s move, the chief disciple of Ven Wu Feng, the monk who had presided over Ming Yi’s ordination in 1984, said it was unlikely that Ming Yi would turn himself in, although “it is what he should do.”
“He’s climbed too far up, and now he has a long way to fall,” said the nun who declined to be named.
knn,$200K,can feed a lot of those patient at Ren Ci Hospital for quite awhile.
not fit to be a monk.
from another forum 3in1 kopitiam:
From: bratsalive 3:11 am
To: Sikodolauka unread (5 of 14)
41767.5 in reply to 41767.3
isn't it sad that the money was lavished and wasted in such a redundant ceremony when it could have been used more constructively?
according to the press, only by 2012 would min yi have served 20yrs. to celebrate his 20 yrs anniversary is already an exaggeration. yet as a monk, he proceeded instead of humbly disagreed to it. why?
according to the buddhist order, min yi has already breached all the 4 GRAVE OFFENCES: taking of life, theft, lust and falsehood.
taking of life: wastage of the money which could have used to save lives as in charitable purposes.
theft: how could a monk be owning so many condos, credit cars, cars and etc. what happened to his vow of denoucement of materialism?
lust: his obssession with raymond yeung and others remain dubious which had sowed the suffering to his present predicament.
falsehood: abet all that had happened, reported and convicted, he is now back into the limelight instead of doing much soul searching and repentance.
dynamic of buddhism is to reap what one sows. whatever min yi was and is sowing is really detrimental to his own effect and also others' perception and faith in buddhism and hence created a bad name for it if nothing is being done to correct this rogue.
people might in the end shun buddhism or be adversely disappointed by it if their belief and faith in buddhism is not firm or correct.
for this, the following applies:
BELIEVE IN THE FAITH OF THE RELIGION BUT NOT IN THE FAITH OF THE ONE WHO PREACHES IT.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
