Should I opt out of DPS?

[royalmix]

So apparently you don't have insurance expenses other than mandatory ones, and yet you do (the DPS), and yet you don't need the DPS, and yet you pay for it.

You always like to over analyse and over assume!

My personal financial plans I dun have to share the details, is secret, for my own benefits only!

Good luck guessing! It is an art, not just a science!

 

[dork32]

Which happens to be reasonable thinking as far as I can tell. The DPS is probably not useful to Hakuna Matata.

FWIW my spouse and I opted out of the DPS. We have at least one dependent, but we didn't/don't need the additional coverage and thus don't pay for it. I still think the DPS is terrific, and it's useful to a lot of people. But not everyone needs it. Fortunately the DPS is a choice, not an obligation.

Do you remember what i said about cpf life? it is a great product, probably the best in the mark, but not everyone needs longevity insurance. You said everyone needs a longevity insurance.

 

[dork32]

So apparently you don't have insurance expenses other than mandatory ones, and yet you do (the DPS), and yet you don't need the DPS, and yet you pay for it.

and if dps is such a great product, why dont you cancel the others and stick to dps?

 

[BBCWatcher]

You said everyone needs a longevity insurance.

Where/when did I write that?

If you have a well-confirmed terminal illness diagnosis then you don't need longevity insurance.

and if dps is such a great product, why dont you cancel the others and stick to dps?

I don't see how this question relates to the paragraph you quoted. It's also an illogical question. Bread and water are both terrific products. That doesn't mean water replaces bread, or vice versa.

 

[dork32]

Where/when did I write that?

If you have a well-confirmed terminal illness diagnosis then you don't need longevity insurance.

I don't see how this question relates to the paragraph you quoted. It's also an illogical question. Bread and water are both terrific products. That doesn't mean water replaces bread, or vice versa.

not only that, if i have a ton of cash that can last me 3 lives over, i do not need any longevity insurance.

same thing, if i have a ton of cash, i do not need a dps.

so dont go around telling everyone that if they are not going to die anytime soon, they are going to need a longevity insurance even though they have confidence that they do not need it.

 

[BBCWatcher]

not only that, if i have a ton of cash that can last me 3 lives over, i do not need any longevity insurance.

Oh, if that's your argument, you're of course welcome to it. But I disagree. Even the world's wealthiest people can lose everything, and (if they're sensible anyway) they're certainly not troubled about CPF LIFE's premium for example. It's extremely common for ultra high net worth individuals to secure high quality longevity insurance at least in some form. But the need is more oriented toward asset protection motivations.

I'm pretty sure I didn't write that everyone needs longevity insurance. I try to choose my words carefully. I might not always succeed in literally every post. But it's disappointing when others misrepresent my views. Start with what I actually wrote if you'd like to disagree with something.

same thing, if i have a ton of cash, i do not need a dps.

The Dependants' Protection Scheme is term life insurance with typical TPD and TI clauses. Different insurance serves different purposes. It's not the same insurance as longevity insurance.

so dont go around telling everyone that if they are not going to die anytime soon, they are going to need a longevity insurance even though they have confidence that they do not need it.

Your view is largely moot in Singapore. The government effectively insists that Singaporean citizens and Singapore Permanent Residents — except the oldest cohorts — buy at least a minimum quantum of longevity insurance if they can reasonably afford it, from compulsory CPF contributions if they have them. It can be CPF LIFE, or it can be a reasonable substitute private longevity insurance (life annuity) policy. I rate the chance of the government changing its policy view on this question somewhere between zero and zero. As in, it's not going to happen. You can keep arguing the point if you want, but I wouldn't bother. I think this policy decision is well and truly settled. Singaporeans a generation or two from now will mostly be mystified why anyone thought/think this is a bad policy. (IMHO it's one of the best policy decisions the government has ever made.)

 

[dork32]

Oh, if that's your argument, you're of course welcome to it. But I disagree. Even the world's wealthiest people can lose everything, and (if they're sensible anyway) they're certainly not troubled about CPF LIFE's premium for example. It's extremely common for ultra high net worth individuals to secure high quality longevity insurance at least in some form. But the need is more oriented toward asset protection motivations.

I'm pretty sure I didn't write that everyone needs longevity insurance. I try to choose my words carefully. I might not always succeed in literally every post. But it's disappointing when others misrepresent my views. Start with what I actually wrote if you'd like to disagree with something.

The Dependants' Protection Scheme is term life insurance with typical TPD and TI clauses. Different insurance serves different purposes. It's not the same insurance as longevity insurance.

Your view is largely moot in Singapore. The government effectively insists that Singaporean citizens and Singapore Permanent Residents — except the oldest cohorts — buy at least a minimum quantum of longevity insurance if they can reasonably afford it, from compulsory CPF contributions if they have them. It can be CPF LIFE, or it can be a reasonable substitute private longevity insurance (life annuity) policy. I rate the chance of the government changing its policy view on this question somewhere between zero and zero. As in, it's not going to happen. You can keep arguing the point if you want, but I wouldn't bother. I think this policy decision is well and truly settled. Singaporeans a generation or two from now will mostly be mystified why anyone thought/think this is a bad policy. (IMHO it's one of the best policy decisions the government has ever made.)

Then you should have dps as well. the insurance company that you engaged could all collapse and you lose all your coverage. just like there is chance of the uhnw people losing their wealth.

and if the rich people are not worried about cpf life premium, they would not worry about dps premium. you should go for dps

and if the rich guys are on dps, you should also be on dps. same like the rich guys are on cpf, the rest of the world should be on dps.

i am not arguing that the garmen is going to change anything. i am saying that their sweeping cpf life scheme may not be the best solution for everyone. it is a very blunt tool. this is like the dps. it is a blunt tool. it does not change anything.

 

[dork32]

look here i am not saying that everyone needs the dps. yes, iagree that you can decide if you need it or not.

this is the same of cpf life. not everyone needs it.

your argument is lame. yes the rich guy can go broke. same thing for the insurance company. they could die as well. it is like a meteor exploded in russia and destroyed a lot of property. we should all not go out. otherwise the meteor will kill you, just like what it did to the russians

 

[BBCWatcher]

this is the same of cpf life. not everyone needs it.

Who's claiming that everyone needs CPF LIFE?

your argument is lame. yes the rich guy can go broke. same thing for the insurance company.

The "insurance company" is the Singapore Central Provident Fund Board in this case. It's a question of mitigating a small but utterly catastrophic risk — what actually happened to Bernie Madoff, for example. The probability that both "the rich guy" and a high quality government (or, better yet, a couple high quality governments if that's an option) go broke is much, much smaller than the probability the rich guy alone goes broke.

Like any other problem you solve problems as best you can. Risk-related problems cannot necessarily be perfectly solved. But better solved is still better.

 

[dork32]

The "insurance company" is the Singapore Central Provident Fund Board in this case. It's a question of mitigating a small but utterly catastrophic risk — what actually happened to Bernie Madoff, for example. The probability that both "the rich guy" and a high quality government (or, better yet, a couple high quality governments if that's an option) go broke is much, much smaller than the probability the rich guy alone goes broke.

Like any other problem you solve problems as best you can. Risk-related problems cannot necessarily be perfectly solved. But better solved is still better.

i am tokking about your coverage. i am not tokking about dps. and if you are saying that you have a huge stash in your cpf and dont need dps, you may kena scam and lose all your cpf.

madof is a cheat. he probably saw that he will be caught one day. not surprised that he buy some insurance to protect himself.

now you go tell kuok and lien that they may go to go bankrupt and they should pump their cpf life to the max and go for longevity insurance to protect themselves. they are going to laugh their toes off. sorry kuok is from bolehland. cannot buy cpflife.

aig almost went under as well. they were selling assets all over to save themselves. there are risk in your insurance companies as well.

now you are tokking about probablity. how probable is a filthy rick guy going brokke? 0.01%? is it worth to pay to insurance against that?

next time just dont say that everyone needs longevity insurance. it is a trash argument .

 

[BBCWatcher]

next time just dont say that everyone needs longevity insurance. it is a trash argument .

Again, who's claiming that everyone needs longevity insurance? I literally just provided an example of a situation when an individual does not need longevity insurance.

If you want to disagree with something I wrote, OK, whatever. Just make sure it's something I actually wrote before disagreeing with it.

 

[dork32]

Again, who's claiming that everyone needs longevity insurance? I literally just provided an example of a situation when an individual does not need longevity insurance.

If you want to disagree with something I wrote, OK, whatever. Just make sure it's something I actually wrote before disagreeing with it.

dont just flip about what you have said. you have mentioned that unless you are about to die, you will need longevity insurance, even if you have billions of dollars. I say you do not need this if you have enough money to last till you die.

 

[8zaoyu]

Relatives? Parents passed away. Only me and my sister. (Both single and unmarried).
Within group benefits plans, this refers specifically to your spouse and children. Parents, grandparents, and cousins for example, are not eligible dependents in a group benefits plan?

Even if single and relatives are all financially ok, I already give monthly to charities also, remember it is very painful and financially stressful to the poor caregivers of humans or even furkids for being so kind. So if can buy within means insurance, do buy! If got bequests even to charities after death, good for your soul, right? Still if you think that you are poorer than giving a bit, just be the "receiver" than the "giver". I also a believer that certain insurance is a scam. But giving a bit to charity is "let me sleep well" and my soul can really RIP.

 

[8zaoyu]

Again, who's claiming that everyone needs longevity insurance? I literally just provided an example of a situation when an individual does not need longevity insurance.

If you want to disagree with something I wrote, OK, whatever. Just make sure it's something I actually wrote before disagreeing with it.

Hey, agree or disagree, CPFB instructed by MOH? already said compulsory to pay Medishield Life premiums by CPF or cash till death, how to revert this Law except those who have no/low CPF and low annual value property.

 

[compro_1975]

i am totally against Medishield Life, i can manage my own, every year the amount they minus is unrealistic..... if i dun even make a single claim, they should return me my premium since it was paid unwillingly.... i am not here to support other lazy people in society

 

[hwmook]

i am totally against Medishield Life, i can manage my own, every year the amount they minus is unrealistic..... if i dun even make a single claim, they should return me my premium since it was paid unwillingly.... i am not here to support other lazy people in society

Everybody pay so you don't support lazy people.

 

[royalmix]

i am totally against Medishield Life, i can manage my own, every year the amount they minus is unrealistic..... if i dun even make a single claim, they should return me my premium since it was paid unwillingly.... i am not here to support other lazy people in society

There is some form of rebate!

Everybody pay so you don't support lazy people.

We all pay to support "needies"!

Same for careshieldlife. This one I did not join, lucky have option!

 

[hwmook]

There is some form of rebate!

We all pay to support "needies"!

Same for careshieldlife. This one I did not join, lucky have option!

Support people who need the treatment. Cannot predict whether you might need the treatment in future also.

 

[BBCWatcher]

Someone weirdly changed the subject to MediShield Life? OK, that's odd.

Y'all should be aware that MediShield Life does not have any preexisting condition limitations. In contrast, all Integrated Shield plans and riders do NOT cover preexisting conditions (with rare exceptions).

If you were born without any preexisting conditions or congenital abnormalities, and you bought an Integrated Shield plan (and continue paying for it) before developing any preexisting conditions, that's either purely or mostly luck. And if you think government (i.e. the public at large) shouldn't help unlucky people, I'm disagreeing with you.

 

[8zaoyu]

i am totally against Medishield Life, i can manage my own, every year the amount they minus is unrealistic..... if i dun even make a single claim, they should return me my premium since it was paid unwillingly.... i am not here to support other lazy people in society

I or most Post-war Boomers like me AGAINST too.
The rest younger than Boomers yet to understand.
DO check the Basic Medishield Life premiums for ages from 60, 65, 70, 75, 80, 85 yo onwards. These middle class Boomers were paid starting salaries of 3 -figures BUT after 60/65 yo, and not working liao got to dig old savings if any to pay a 4-figure amount yearly. To pay for the low classes non-working housewives/lie-flatters without much CPF but Long-lives.
Realistically now is to keep away/used up all your own CPF (not much actually) before you retire!
Unless next year (post 65 liao) you can draw down, no max to Enhanced CPF (4 x), my thinking may not be your thinking.