What subsidy are they talking about now? Didn’t MBT recently said that the price of HDB flats are now based on market value? I really pitied those who had recently placed their booking on those sky rocketed price at the pinnacle, a site which was previously occupied by those really subsidized flats by the early garment. Now, they turning it into a multi millions HDB high condo to maximize and profiteering from the people instead.

In comparison, although China’s exports is hugh in terms of raw numbers, $1.2 trillion, it accounts only for about 40% of their GDP at $3.2 trillion [3].

[1] http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/bgn/2798.htm (exports= $313 bil, GDP=$168bil)
[2] http://earthtrends.wri.org/text/economics-business/country-profile-160.html
[3] http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/bgn/18902.htm

Now that new HDB flats are sold based on prices of resale flats which are set by the market, this income ceiling rule should be abolished. New HDB flats are not priced based on cost.

HDB is now operating like a private developer – out to maximise profit. While developers give discounts, HDB thinks “market subsidy” sounds better politically. This so-called “market subsidy” given by HDB is just an opportunity cost, not a real cost or subsidy in the real sense of the word “subsidy”. Nowhere in the world does anyone use the uniquely Singapore term “market subsidy”.

That, and HDB’s assumption that it is mostly eldery retirees that would be interested in the studio flats. (As can be seen from their “consideration” in fitting studio flats with “elderly-friendly features”.) This deepens the stereotype of “HDB Studio = Home for the aged”.

Also, if the average household is only using 20% of their income to pay HDB mortgages as they claimed, I wonder why is it then that there are so many buyers who are having problems paying (the number is way higher than the unemployment figure).

if i say there are more than 500 people who turned up for free mee siam ,
but in fact there were 1000, is that a false report? No. It was still right – 1000 is more than 500.

lesson learnt.

thank you you.

wow, i get over bombasticated by the news that was.
anyone know more about the thingy?

there was this aunty who was scared will be retrenched. So, she registered a business.

I think this will help lower unemployment, on paper at least
[/i]
yeap our government is very very good @ changin figures
zero umemployments
the ROC have 1 million buisness registration everyday
everyday many aunties/uncle become paperless towkay/towkayneos
some become chapjikees towkays
some are footballs beter towkays
some even 4Ds towkays
working only on weekends
rakin a fortunes
helpin ahlong big ears rakin more fortunes
the ministry of manpower must be feelin REAL REAL proud…

To #1 Matheson on December 29th, 2008 9.57 am

My experience is similar to yours, perhaps we both happened to be in similar industry sectors. Nominal wages have not increase in the past 10+ years, since 1997 financial crisis. Combined with inflationary effects, real wages have actually shrank. Add to that the shortened economic cycles and longer economic trough (recessions) of the new millennium, even professionals, management, executives and the likes are not immune to sudden economic hardship.

To #10 Beng Hu Tin on December 29th, 2008 2.40 pm

Some examples of the ABC’s rationale that I’ve come across are as follow.

1. Due to personal circumstances, need MP to write to HDB to appeal for deferment or re-structure HDB loan payment. Therefore, die-die must vote PAP in GRC because of that person’s perception that HDB will process appeal letters from PAP MPs faster and is more likely to approve it.

2. Life is good. Big ticket items are paid partially or fully by baby-boomer parents who happened to benefit from the Singapore’s 70′s-80′s boom years. Both baby-boomer parents and adult-child are pro-PAP as they have benefited from the “PAP created wealth”. Actually, the adult-child would not be able to afford the good life without their parents’ backing in the current economic situation. When pressed, the “good lifers” sometimes raised that since they and their parents did well, those struggling have only themselves or their parents to be blamed.

3. “Tall poppies get chopped” syndrome. I observed this amongst my younger acquaintances. I suspect it may be related to them being well-indoctrinated by the National Education syllabus not to be seen to stand for anything. Sadly, this group may “taichi” the speaking up (of their requests, preferences and opinions) to a more outspoken member, but simultaneously ostracising that same member. These young folks think they are being street-smart by assuring their win-in-both-ways. E.g. Should the authority-figure (e.g. teacher or manager) disapprove, they are seen as toeing-the-line and not trouble-makers. However, should the authority-figure approve of the request, they will also benefit from the blanket coverage of the privilege offered. Initially, I was shocked by the prevalence of such an attitude, but now I think that it is an insidious part of the typical Singaporean psyche. Ashamed to admit that I, too, am increasingly guilty of such “silent majority” behaviour when mixing with such a cowardly group.

4. “Singapore has changed so much, that I no longer fit in” syndrome. Personally I belong to this category. Years ago, as a young graduate, I was an active volunteer “to repay society” for the benefit of a tertiary education (i.e. the acknowledgement that such education is not possible without public funding). With the influx of cheap foreign “on-paper qualified” “talents”, employers (especially untalented kiasu kiasi Singaporean bosses) demand work hours that exclude such volunteerism and eat drastically into one’s social time. I do not find such work-life imbalance acceptable in the long run. I no longer seek to change a society to which I don’t feel that I belong. My plan is to migrate in a few years’ time, so why rock the boat and leave a record that may mar my exit plans. Nowadays, the most I would do is rant online, share with off-line friends about alternatives to MSM news and do the occasional small kind deed for strangers in my neighbourhood. That said, I’d still “vote for change” while I’m still here in Singapore.

There are so many statistics, information, data of finanical reports being dished out to the public that I have started to lose interest.

Some maybe they lack a sense of bao qing tian in them. afterall, no one owes anyone any living. so, why be concerned when not affecting oneself?

However, I need to point out to ABCs :
1. For case of mini bon bons, the broader implication is about rectifying a system that needs to be improved IF indeed there is mis-selling or if there is possible improvement to regulation work. so a lot of IFs. nevertheless, there is a need to be concerned about such issues. In future, we all may be investing or need to invest. a better system is better for all.

2. what does not affect u now, does not mean you will be forever immune to it. Wealth cannot be guaranteed forever. Misfortunes befall on people. One day you may not be immuned. One day you may be affected. being apathetic is not socially responsible in a way and being bochap is not wise for the long term.

3. Righteous-spirit is important to a society. Without it , society becomes cold blooded.

My challenge to Apathetic By Choice people is for them to answer the questions that beg to be asked in a way that you can convince the 33.3 with your intellectual answers. If you find that you cannot succeed in this, you may realise there is something that needs to be improved and its time you face the problem and not avoid it.

The main problem, is actually Apathy By Choice (ABC).
Apathy by ignorance is less of a problem than the above.
I feel that there should be a statistic on ABCs.

ABC : some purposely ignore the tough questions and hope that these questions will go away on their own. They do not feel comfortable facing these questions. They hold a stand that is firm and deep rooted. Its like complete bias.

Tough questions exist and is now everywhere on the net.

Some how, some people prefer to ignore.

We need to interview these ABCs and document their psychology and mentality so that the non-apathetic by choice (NBC)s can understand why these humans exist.

Is there incentives that cause ABCs to be ABCs?
Do they have vested interests?
There must be strong reasons why they are ABCs.

why is oil price not linked to transport hike?
why is transport fare not lowered when oil price has dropped to very cheap level?
How can people choose to ignore these questions?

we’ve been encouraged to go for house brands, no frills, take frozen meat. It’s clear this was coming and now being proven in statistics( thank you Mr. Leong) yet nothing is done to address this.

if the recent sinking investment (loss incur) not happen,

not sure how many people can be benefitted??

aiyoyo

Good point. I was asking a better informed non partisan friend the other day. New flats are still priced significantly lower than resale. (excluding Duxton) But of course you have to wait in the queue. I believe there is a very complex system at work here, and HDB isn’t completely at fault for the high RESALE market value. In the past, the population was exploding, and new flats have to be constantly built to meet the demand, and they were affordable. Then population growth slowed, and suddenly we find demand for new flats dropping, as almost everyone got a roof over their heads liao. I mean, if you are HDB you will not want to overbuild right, and I think that is when the whole resale thingy started. Honestly, we are also at fault for the crazy resale prices.

Very simplistic explanation… but I think we have to consider all these factors before we can have a solution. You want cheaper flats you just have to wait a bit longer. But I feel the first step is to overhaul the dated HDB income-ceiling structure. A First-World stat board shouldn’t have a system that hasn’t changed in years.