—-
Jun 29, 2005 in My Shout Outs
Interviews interviews and more interviews.
I behave strangely sometimes. I upload resumes, get called for interviews and rejected all but a few so far.
Maybe it is not my who’s strange. I upload my resume which states very clearly what I am after yet I get calls to insurance companies for positions as financial advisors. Why? If I wanted to do that I would have worked in our own family ‘business’..
Anyone has any technical work at their work place up for grabs?
Speaking of insurance, I chanced upon a report on this guy named Chrstopher who was putting down the entire population of financial advisors, seemingly implying they are out to commission as much as they could regardless of what their clients really needed. He tabulated critical illness policies having huge premiums in comparison to policies that pay out on hospital admission and surgeries. My overall feel to it is the same as a certain person who sells Aviva policies to recruits in BMT. A very biased approach which does not hold the entire truth. Yet damaging statements are made like “between 50 bucks in commission or 5k, which would you push for if you were an agent.” Quote unquote.
I hope someone speaks up soon. The profession is at stake and I hope it doesn’t come to a point where everyone feels someone will write in and then ultimately no one does.
My opinion is simple. State what you feel. That is fine. Do not put someone or a profession down. If you were a job applicant going for an interview and they ask why did you decide to leave your current company and you say cause you and your boss had disagreements and he is a maniac, you’ll think you’re insulting him but in the eyes of the interviewer, you are insulting yourself just as well. Besides how does he know if one day you will not bad mouth him the same way. He’ll probably pass the buck on you.
Hmm hardly relevant, but indeed, damaging statements should not be made to confuse the public. If a doctor came up one day and crititised something, and the profession (he was a doctor but decided to become a lawyer cause he couldn’t stand the way fellow doctors practiced in the past) with facts that the general population will not fully understand yet enough to cause a panic, I think it is so wrong…
I was chatting with my mom about CPF earlier. Goodness knows how the topic came about. Oh yes she said I should work asap to get CPF contribution else I lag behind my peers and I shot back at her “What for?”
This whole CPF, when I thought of it, its a dodgy thing. Its main aim is to ensure the citizens when they do retire they have enough to go through their retirement independently, isn’t it? At least, its primary role, so the government will not have to step in with welfare and stuff for every retiree. But in the past, we could use our CPF contributions for shares, unit trusts..what else? A whole lot. Now it is being clamped down to housing and stuff. If I had a say, I say prohibit housing as well. Why? When you get a house, I presume you ought to be working. If you can afford to get a house you should be able to service the loan and interest of the bank. Having 60k and buying a car at the cost of 60K does not imply I can maintain it. What is the point of CPF if when I retire, I do not have enough? It is meant to safeguard my own interest isn’t it? Why not lock it in. By using cpf to pay for housing, it ‘free’s up some of my cash, which probably will be used on silly things. Think about it. Never mind the dual purpose of having CPF funds for the government to invest (there is no such thing as a free lunch where someone keeps money for you for no reason)., its main aim is to ensure a good sum for us to retire. Many of us simply do not have that sum! And then we say, when we are old, “better to be dead then sick.”
Working individuals on average, should have the ability to finance their housing loans. The CPF should be locked for their own sake. All too often than not, it is not, and that is where financial advisors come in these days, to draft out your plan for you all the way to retirement to ensure that you have more than a few dollars left. The use of CPF for insurance policies is fair enough for it covers would-be expenditures, both for self, or for the family. Housing takes off a huge chunk of it even though it has a ceiling and coupled with little bits and pieces of purchases that can be used with the CPF fund, there is really very little left. I would look and streamline what that can be purchased using CPF and what that cannot.
A plan, that does not achieve its ultimate goal eventually, is considered a failure to me. If by the time I retire and I do not have much left, it is partially my fault for over utilising my CPF funds, and also the government’s, for making it possible. The fact that property valuation can go up is not relevant. It can also go down, and what am I supposed to do, sell my property and live with a child of mine when I retire?
The flexibility is there, I suppose end of the day it is our responsibility to ensure we have enough when we retire. How do we define enough? Good question, it is tough, but at least a sizable amount considering the age we retire. A financial planner can do an educated analysis for us I believe.
Nuff said.
Been rather ill with fever and throat inflammation again. It is better now..Lots of studies and assignments to do. Been prepping myself ready for the treadmill championship challenge beginning july. Carbo intake increased and I do expect to lose at least 1.5kg of water and another plus minus 1kg of fat mass during the actual run. Longest distance wins. My goal? No idea, we’ll see how far I can go before I tap out. At least 30km. There are rules and it favours people who can visit the gym during off peak hours. The mighty mark system says it needs the rest before the challenge, with a mild increase in fat storage that will be used during the run. That fat will come from carbs which is essentially sugar that we are talking about and not chicken skin mind you
Will tell more bout that in the later days. Have a good midweek everyone!





