Is it Viable for EPF to support Subprime Loan? (Feb2012)

In 2008, we have seen the catastrophic effect from the subprime mortgage loan in US. Even now, US is still struggling to fully recover from their worst financial crisis since Great Depression. The problems doesn't build in one day, in fact, it took years to snowball the problem. And, yet Malaysia seems like wanting to catch up with them by supporting the subprime loan. But, the unique part of our version is "using EPF monies"?


When news first broke out last month that EPF would be channelling RM1.5bil for a special public housing scheme, alarm bells sounded off for many contributors. Maybe EPF already knew the result for last year performance, it announced later that contributors are getting a decade-high dividend rate of 6%. Salute to EPF. Since EPF are doing so good even without the said "loan", then, why EPF have to take the risk to loan out to this scheme?

Afterthat, EPF published a statement claiming that the money is loaned to the Government, not to individuals. All the proceeds will go through a special purpose vehicle of Federal Territories Foundation (SPV FT Foundation) where terms and conditions are set.

YOU must be kidding, very obvious the end borrower was individuals, not Government. Where does the risk comes from? Ultimately, the individual borrowers are the one who determine the survival of the scheme.


What EPF gets?
For us, the most important detail that's available is 5.5% profit. The rest, it's very surface only without much details, such as the process of borrowers selections, criteria for loan application, and a lot of what if... Transparency is not there either.

No worry, Government can GUARANTEE the scheme mah!!! Yet, another question comes in. How does Government guaratee it? If something goes wrong to EPF monies, Government will use its money to compensate EPF?

Wait... Doesn't Government money belong to us too?

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

"You Can Keep Your Existing Health Insurance"

I wondered about this statement at the time Obama made it.  Clearly, by changing all the rules of health care insurance and mandating conformity, it was unlikely that the vast majority of Americans would not find themselves forced by 'The Affordable Care Act' to have to deal with a completely different health insurance plan and completely different set of health care providers. I now understand what Obama meant.   He was speaking to his immediate family and (politician) friends.  They are exempt from the "Affordable Care Act."  Clearly what he meant to say was: "if you are exempt from Obamacare, like me and my family, you can keep your existing health insurance."  He never meant to mislead.
Read more

Why Gold and Silver? Why Online Store?

Image
Are you first time gold and silver buyers? Why don't you invest in these popular metals? If you did so, you have had a wonderful investing experience after 2008 global financial crisis. But, do you really understand these metals? Were they really precious (especially now)? Traditionally, gold and silver were one form of exchange. Because of the invention of fiat money, they were being turned into some short of "back-up" currency , in case our fiat money system go burst. It's natural when things go wrong, gold and silver tends to appreciate in value. In other words, people hold precious metals to preserve the value of their assets. 3 Reasons Why Gold and Silver... Still hot in demand , especially by emerging affluent Chinese. Traditionally, Chinese loves gold. They bought it for events such as new born baby, new year, wedding and even funeral ceremony. Strengthening USD ??? Yes. It's a correct reason also. Why? Because of news that US going to stop QE3, USD is str...
Read more

Things We Now Know

The poor are losing ground in the new Obama world.  The facts are showing up even in the halls of collectivist extremes like the New York Times.  The rich are getting richer and poor are being locked in place.  Big government is throttling the economy and the hopes and dreams of lower and middle class Americans. Today's Wall Street Journal's article by Simon Constable lays out some of the simple and obvious facts of the Obama era: "The richest 20% of households account for 38% of spending, according to government data for 2011, the latest available.  Compare that with 2003 when the top earners spent 26% of the total."  The article goes on to say..."it could get even worse."  It will. Who really benefits when the regulators strangle the banks?  Do banks really need to get much more conservative in their lending practices?  Why does the government know best?  How far can you stretch the FDIC guarantees before American banking is simply a subsid...
Read more