Singapore is one of the last countries one will be a 'serf' in.

The parent contributor has conveniently left out the fact that the 37% of CPF contributions is split 20-17 in terms of employee-employer contributions[1], and has a ceiling of S$8000[2], so if one earns more than that, every additional dollar goes entirely to them, which is also taxed at globally low income tax rates[3]. One can put all one's post-tax money into any stocks/bonds/funds, and there is also no capital gains tax[4].

[1]: https://www.cpf.gov.sg/employer/employer-obligations/how-muc...

[2]: https://www.cpf.gov.sg/employer/infohub/news/cpf-related-ann...

[3]: https://www.iras.gov.sg/taxes/individual-income-tax/basics-o...

[4]: https://www.iras.gov.sg/taxes/individual-income-tax/basics-o...

▲

gruez 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

>The parent contributor has conveniently left out the fact that the 37% of CPF contributions is split 20-17 in terms of employee-employer contributions[1]

This point is a shell game, because the employer's share is still effectively being taken from the employee. It's equivalent of "tariffs are paid by foreigners!" that's trotted out for supporting tariffs.

	▲	kaashif an hour ago \| parent [-]
		I almost feel like the employee/employer distinction is actually worse than tariff fakery because at least tariffs are somewhat confusing to the average person, so you almost see why they get fooled. But I feel like no-one would be fooled if you changed an e to an r on payslips (employee contribution to employer) - it's just obviously the same.

▲

dmoy 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

$8000 is considerably above median income, no?

	▲	InkCanon 4 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Yes. Bluntly put, the government maximizes residence of high net worth individuals, and a 37% forced purchase of low interest bonds would be outrageous to them.