2019 XMSS Prelim MS

1 2019 XMSS Prelim Marking SchemeSection A: Source-Based Case Study1(a)Do you think the author is a supporter of CPF Life? Explain your answer. [5]Level Level DescriptorMarks AllocationL4Valid Main message, supported.The author in Source A is a supporter of CPF Life because he thinks that CPF Life would be beneficial for Singaporeans in the long run as it helps Singaporeans have a stable income upon retirement. In Source A, he draws connection of the government’s responsible act of planning for Singaporeans’ future retirement to a mother taking the responsibility to plan for her child’s future by “putting aside a portion of her child’s red packet money despite the child not liking it” to ensure that her child has enough to sustain his/her future. Thus the author is appreciative of the government’s efforts in helping Singaporeans prepare for their retirement as he understands that through the CPF Life Scheme, Singaporeans would still have a stable income due to their CPF contributions thus allowing greater certainty for their retirement regardless of “how old we live till and how the financial world may be”. This implies that Singaporeans will still have a stable income retirement even if they outlive their savings. As the scheme safeguards the financial circumstances of the retirees, he is supportive of the scheme. 3-4m L5L4 + Purpose (TA +RTA+tone+situation)To convince Singaporeans to be less critical about CPF Life/support the government’s effort in safeguarding their interest through CPF Life at a time when some Singaporeans have opposed the CPF Life scheme as they feel that the money in CPF belongs to them.4-5m1(b)Study Source B.Why do you think this poster was published? Explain your answer using details from the source. [6m]Level Level DescriptorMarks AllocationL5L4 + reason based on context of the timeE.g. The poster was published to convince Singaporeans that CPF Life is beneficial / useful / effective / helpful in providing for them financially after retirement so they will support the scheme. The poster hopes to convince Singaporeans that with CPF Life, retirees are able to support themselves financially till the day they die. The evidence is ‘A Singaporean retiree saying that he can retire with a peace of mind while receiving monthly payouts from CPF Life for life’. Since their financial stability will be safeguarded, they would support the scheme. The poster was published in view that there was a lack of understanding/awareness about the scheme and there were many who opposed it/viewed CPF Life negatively because of the need to set aside a Basic Retirement Sum of $171,000 in one’s Retirement Account when one is 55 years old 5-6m

2 limits/greatly reduces the amount that one can withdraw from CPF, and that had upset many Singaporeans. 1(c)Study Sources C and D.How different are the two sources? Explain your answer.[7m]Level Level DescriptorMarks AllocationL3Similarity and Difference in content, supportedThe sources are similar in pointing out the shortcoming/flaws/problem of the CPF Life scheme. In Source C, the author points out that the “minimum sum will keep increasing through the years” and that “wages are not increasing as fast as the increase in minimum sum means that we can never keep up”. In Source D, it is stated that “in 2016, 42% of active CPF members at age 55 do not meet the Basic Retirement Sum”. The evidence from both sources point out that the minimum sum is too high and difficult to achieve, thus the CPF Life scheme is not helpful for many Singaporeans. The sources differ in why Singaporeans dislike/are unhappy with /critical of the CPF Life scheme. In Source C, the author is upset with the lack of personal choice. He says, “our own money in our own CPF account is beyond our reach” and that “we can’t withdraw our CPF money because of the high minimum sum decided by the government”, and “It's our money after all yet we can’t decide how we want to spend it”. The Labour Union Chief in Source D asserts that CPF Life is not comprehensive/inclusive enough and needs to be improved. This is evident in “Mrs Teo suggested that workers who do not have the BRS at age 55 to continue to work over the next 10 years to make up for this shortfall” and “the circumstances of being poor force you to “work until you die” in order to have adequate savings in retirement”, and “we need to prevent that”. 4 – 5m L4Difference in perspective of speakers (examine tone)Award 7m for well-developed explanations of both sources’ tone.Ultimately, the two sources differ in perspective as Source C reflects the views on an individual who is very critical of the CPF life because the existing scheme affects his self interest whereas Source D reflects the view of a Labour Union Chief who points out the flaws with the existing seem and is urging for a review so that workers (lower SES) would also be able to enjoy the benefits of CPF Life. Thus, the sources differ in tone. Source C is very negative and critical of CPF Life, his bitterness can be seen from the line, “if you are high income earners earning more than $10,000 a month, then it’s no issue”, and from “there’s so much frustration and anger when the government keeps increasing the minimum sum beyond the inflation rate until Singaporeans lose faith and trust”. Clearly, he is unhappy with the government and not supportive of CPF Life. On the other hand, while Source D also points out that the minimum sum is an issue, it adopts a more objective and reconciliatory/hopeful approach while criticising the scheme. The speaker uses statistics provided by the government, and appears to be asking the government to pay special attention to the 42% of active CPF members who at age 55 are unable to hit the minimum sum. He asserts, “Low-skilled and low-income workers are prone to be exploited, all because of the very limited jobs they can 6-7m

3 undertake given their age and skills”, he is concerned that workers are being forced to “work until you die”, “in order to have adequate savings in retirement” and asserts that “We need to prevent that”. His words reflect unlike the author in Source C, he still has faith and trust in the government to improve the CPF Life scheme in order to benefit more workers. Also accept valid analyses of purposes:C: get Singaporeans to voice out their concerns D: get government to do more to help the lower SES.1(d)Study Sources E & F.Having read Source E, are you surprised by Source F? Explain your answer.[7m]LevelDescriptorMarkL3No – because of the similarity between Sources E and FAward 4m for well-developed explanationNo, after reading Source E, I do not find Source F surprising as both sources clearly show great approval of the CPF scheme and credits the government for it. The foreigner in Source E praises the CPF scheme. She says, “the Singaporean CPF cannot be compared to the Dutch or European social welfare”, lamenting that her contributions ranging from 37% to 52% “goes up into thin air” as they are used to fund those who “are unable or are just too lazy to work”. But Singapore CPF scheme could help an individual to “buy a house with, retire comfortably with, or to see our kids go through college”. She also asserts that “If I were you, I would be happy to be able to live in Singapore where everything is so well-organised, your future retirement plan taken care of”. Similarly in Source F, the professor shares that foreigners envy Singapore’s CPF scheme. He asserts that when foreigners hear about CPF scheme from him at international conferences, they ask "Can foreigners buy it?", and asserts that “Many people here are not aware that a 4 to 5 per cent interest rate guaranteed by a government and the occasional CPF top-ups are simply unique” and that “it’s the best retirement plan you can find”. Both sources view the CPF scheme as