SG Talk

Sweetlands Childcare director fined for colluding with parents to withdraw S$133,000 from CDAs

MSF officers told her many times not to operate such a scheme but she continued with it over almost four years

💰 https://tdy.sg/3H4w670

@todayonlinesg

Govt money so easy to makan meh?

Much easier to makan dumbass Sinkies, just need to ask if they are PAP supporters or not, if yes, carry on, they're confirmed dumbasses

Fire away!

I thought she committed a crime when I read the headlines but in fact she helped many poor parents.

A many govt schemes are designed to disadvantaged poor parents by requiring parents to deposit money before matching top-ups. Despite many people writing in to ask the govt to stop this poor families cannot afford these top ups and will lose out.

If you become jobless and have no money, you won't be able to do these top ups to get some aid for your child. 

Yes, only in Singapore they can implement such a scheme that penalises the poor


Here she is helping parents top up so they get money to give their children better education.

She should be given a National.Day Award not charged

She was help the govt to clean its shit.

Many in service industry is also taking advantage of Govt grant to get money and then pay many zombies CPF people to sustain the quota.

Heard many earn millions from the grants.

(26-01-2022, 12:32 PM)sgbuffett Wrote: [ -> ]I thought she committed a crime when I read the headlines but in face she helped many poor parents.

A many govt schemes are designed to disadvantaged poor parents by requiring parents to deposit money before matching top-ups. Despite many people writing in to ask the govt to stop this poor families cannot afford these top ups and will lose out.

If you become jobless and have no money, you won't be able to do these top ups to get some aid for your child. 

Yes, only in Singapore they can implement such a scheme that penalises the poor


Here she is helping parents top up so they get money to give their children better education.

She should be given a National.Day Award not charged

She was help the govt to clean its shit.

Did Ms Chan S.S did a good deed or did a criminal act.......

(26-01-2022, 12:37 PM)debono Wrote: [ -> ]Did Ms Chan S.S did a good deed or did a criminal act.......

Here in Singapore can be both at same time.

Overzealous authorities have nothing better to do?

Go and stop all those scams plse and leave Ms Chan alone!

(26-01-2022, 12:40 PM)sgbuffett Wrote: [ -> ]Here in Singapore can be both at same time.

Overzealous authorities have nothing better to do?

Go and stop all those scams plse and leave Ms Chan alone!

This is a good call for the authorities to look into scams, rather than to check on petty crimes.....

(26-01-2022, 12:41 PM)debono Wrote: [ -> ]This is a good call for the authorities to look into scams, rather than to check on petty crimes.....

I think it's not a crime but a help poor parents scheme.
She loan them money to put in  CDA for govt top ups to be used to help children education.

I don't see a single thing wrong!!!

(26-01-2022, 12:55 PM)sgbuffett Wrote: [ -> ]I think it's not a crime but a help poor parents scheme.
She loan them money to put in  CDA for govt top ups to be used to help children education.

I don't see a single thing wrong!!!

But our govt. will think otherwise.......

Colluding? Sounds like disGrace type of Culture to accuse others.

Did the law say cannot help the parents?

PAP should look into why disGrace "collude" with own Stat Board to over- pay $13 Mil for National Gallery Project.

(26-01-2022, 12:32 PM)sgbuffett Wrote: [ -> ]I thought she committed a crime when I read the headlines but in fact she helped many poor parents.

A many govt schemes are designed to disadvantaged poor parents by requiring parents to deposit money before matching top-ups. Despite many people writing in to ask the govt to stop this poor families cannot afford these top ups and will lose out.

If you become jobless and have no money, you won't be able to do these top ups to get some aid for your child. 

Yes, only in Singapore they can implement such a scheme that penalises the poor


Here she is helping parents top up so they get money to give their children better education.

She should be given a National.Day Award not charged

She was help the govt to clean its shit.

Haha.. yah, at first I thought she has committed a crime but now it seemed like she has done a good deed.

What's wrong with what she is doing? If the parents borrow from her as a friend, deposited the money then in return the parents enrolled kids in her school. Same outcome rite?

All the govt wanted of the scheme is parents deposit for the kids and then the money is used for education rite? Cannot have others facilitate the process?

(26-01-2022, 02:20 PM)Sticw Wrote: [ -> ]What's wrong with what she is doing? If the parents borrow from her as a friend, deposited the money then in return the parents enrolled kids in her school. Same outcome rite?

All the govt wanted of the scheme is parents deposit for the kids and then the money is used for education rite? Cannot have others facilitate the process?

Again authorities have wasted time and money to go after this type of thing which does not concern us at all. In the end the money goes towards helping children from poor families.

We are concerned about those frequent scams and cons the victimise citizens and cause fear.

Plse take action on what matters.

(26-01-2022, 02:32 PM)sgbuffett Wrote: [ -> ]Again authorities have wasted time and money to go after this type of thing which does not concern us at all. In the end the money goes towards helping children from poor families.

We are concerned about those frequent scams and cons the victimise citizens and cause fear.

Plse take action on what matters.

They are only good at punishing honest citizens who has done minimal harm. But they don't go for high rollers...

This is a classic case of a well thought out policy that appears to make sense in theory but ending up having an opposite effect.

The whole idea for a $1 for $1 top up in CDA account is to encourage parents to spend responsibly by being 50% co-invested in their child's CDA. If the government simply deposits money into a child's CDA, many parents might be encouraged to just enroll for whatever expensive stuff without considering thoroughly in order to "encash" the free monies.

The psychology is that if you yourself also have money vested, you will be spending your own money as well and thus will be more careful. It works on the same principle as insurance co-payments and deductibles.

The problem is this creates two very bad effects on child raising:

1) The bottom quartile income parents have no means to fork out the upfront cash and end up losing a grant needlessly. This aggravates their financial situation and most are forced to only stick with the cheapest necessities for their child. From a longer term perspective, this will likely exacerbate social inequality in the future due to uneven developmental opportunities.

2) The 2nd and 3rd quartile income parents a.k.a. the middle class who can afford to unlock the grant now end up with a bloated CDA which can only be spent on a fixed criteria of items. The business people sense the increased spending power and straight away increase pricing on eligible items thereby causing higher than normal inflation on CDA claimable items. The end result is an overall increase in child raising for everyone including the rich and poor which further erodes fertility rate.

After detecting abnormal price inflation, the government likely realized the ill effects of their policy. For whatever reasons, they decided to maintain policy but tried to mitigate the second problem by introducing favorable rental policies and price caps for anchor tenants such as NTUC and PCF in order to bring the overall costs down. Subsequently they relaxed the criteria slightly such that government will make a small initial grant before requiring parents to top up for matching grants.

While this has some effect, majority of middle income parents who can afford appear to have opted to continue to spend money on expensive child services with the belief that these "real" private operators are better. If you look at kids from major operators such as PCF, NTUC and MOE-K, it's pretty apparent the kids there are disproportionately under represented by middle income families.

On a side topic is the tax rebate given to parents who have kids.
It has to be claimed within 5yrs... Low income parents who pay less income tax cannot claim fully or get nothing..... obviously it is designed to penalise the poor. Why not just give it out as CDA or CPF top ups so it is fair to everyone.