A larger Election issue than the childish Gomez hoo-haa
- Important Note for fellow S'poreans:
In the event our shamelessly pro-PAP (instead of pro-Singapore) Media will not publish or censor my contributed letter below, please help to circulate freely/widely (way before this Saturday's Polling Day) to all interested parties.
Insightful Quotation:
"Singapore is a supposedly First-World Country with a supposedly Open Government, run by supposedly World-Class million-dollar ministers and supposedly First-Class half-a-million dollar senior civil servants." - Original Text of my letter sent to TODAY newspaper:
I refer to your report "Mah to SDA: Want to build flats for me?" (May 2).
It has been rightly described that our private home prices are "obscene" while HDB flat prices are "sky-high". Indeed, the exorbitant cost for something as basic as a roof over our heads is a major factor behind our high cost of living.
Some 90% of Singaporeans (ranging from managers to low-salaried workers) are thus resigned to living in HDB flats. Hence, they have every right to know whether HDB flats are priced with a true cash subsidy or a cleverly-disguised profit.
Over the past five years, various writers in newspaper forums have rightly questioned why a new HDB 5-rm flat is priced upwards of $200,000 when its construction cost is around $50,000 (as revealed from actual HDB construction contracts).
As HDB flats are now built higher and closer together i.e. many units occupying a tiny plot of land, it is a lame argument for the HDB to say that the hugh difference of $150,000 is accounted for by land cost and other related costs.
The HDB's standard dodgy reply has been that a so-called "market subsidy" is provided for new HDB flats to make them "affordable" i.e. they are priced below their equivalent market value.
This is how the "market subsidy" pricing approach works. The HDB will first look at the prevailing market value of a 5-rm resale flat (say, $260,000) and then "pluck from the air" a slightly lower figure (say,$200,000) as the selling price of the 5-rm new flat --- never mind even if its total breakeven cost is probably around $120,000!
The HDB can then boast that the new flat buyer is getting a $60,000 "market subsidy" --- when there is actually no "true cash subsidy" at all.
Instead, from the example given, the HDB is raking in a handsome profit of $80,000 for each new flat sold.
Indeed, this ingenious "market subsidy" approach had resulted in new flat prices and resale flat prices chasing each other in an upward spiral --- to the detriment of all buyers of both new and resale flats.
During this election, our educated thinking voters were not amused (much less impressed) by the never-ending nagging and nitpicking over an administrative form-filling issue.
Compared to this childish hullabaloo, how HDB flats are priced is certainly a larger national issue related to First-World transparent governance.
Mr Mah Bow Tan should thus seize this golden opportunity to demonstrate to our citizen-voters his ministerial mettle and justify his handsome remuneration in providing simple honest answers to these pertinent questions:
Since HDB flats are supposed to be low-cost mass public housing, why is the HDB not helping our citizens in home ownership by passing on to them the cost-savings from economies of scale in massive HDB developments through pricing new flats on a cost-recovery breakeven no-profit basis?
Are HDB new flats priced with a "true cash subsidy"?
If the answer is No, say so directly and openly.
If the answer is Yes, convince the people with detailed numbers and indicate the amount of the true cash subsidy.
Unfortunately, these areas are X-files, and no one, not even President Ong Teng Cheong was able to "check" the government or Mr Lee (God father).
ReplyDeleteWe can all go on guessing.
There are a lot of questions that our government has not openly answered.
ReplyDeleteThat's why we need opposition parties in the cabinet to raise such questions and "hopefully" get answers.
Why no information on this issue? Because they are paid to empty all our CPF savings and want us to slog harder, longer and fearful of losing our jobs because practically everyone has a housing loan. Even now the housing price cannot drop as it will affects the majority of people. They paid high salary for these smart people for what purpose. Simple but subtle "an absolute grip on power".
ReplyDeletePAP scheme to achieve 100 % control of singapore:
ReplyDelete- Let innocent Sngapore commit into overpriced HDB, then they will be singapore slave for life.
With locking them into the overpriced properties with tons of restriction imposed...they will hv no choice to to slog for PAP for life.
If not how are singpore goin to afford to pay the ministers pay?
HDB started out as a body tht provides low cost housing to needy ppl ..turn to a multi million profit making co.
Our Gov said this election is very important to all Singaporean. I strongly agreed cos i m a
ReplyDeleteSingaporean it concern me but Y ?? I m not given a fair chance to VOTE ??? Can't for once the whole nation vote together br it PAP/SAP/WP or etc... Answer is "NO" again Y ??? Cos this is our GOV set and said here come the Question : DID U PICK THEM TO BE OUR GOV ? ? When I was born they are already the GOV, till today they are still our GOV but never once the GOV ask me, DO I WANT THEM TO BE OUR GOV !!! Be fair to all Singaporean if is so important the election let the whole nation vote...... What I wantfrom my GOV is to show me all they know beside just leading and 1st GOV must open their ear to listen to me cos I m a Singaporean I have my right to pick my GOVERNMNENT.
You must be joking there are subsidies for HDB flats. Back in the late seventies, eighties and possibly nineties, HDB funded its construction projects with money from the CPF. And CPF has to pay interest on the contributions from us, meaning HDB must make at least some percentage from the sale of its flats in order to enable CPF to pay us interest. So how can there be a subsidy. You must be joking.
ReplyDeleteI have an alternate view. I think Singapore should make the super normal profits and redistribute it correctly rather then let individual benefit from the profit they get when they sell their heavily subsidised HDB.
ReplyDeleteHowever, no one is able to justify whether the redistribution of profit is fair or not judging from the minister pay.
Where on earth that HDB is subsidize ?? I bought a hse in Sengkang ( 5 rm ) after minus subsides so call, I still paid $ 257 K ( Bare Unit ) without flooring tiles from living to dinning to all 3 rooms. I reluctant bought it coz I do not want them to freeze my CPF money until 62 yrs old.. and only allow to get 40 % payout of total sum inside my CPF Oridinary acct.to withdraw.Agree with all S'porean ,PAP want us to keep borrowing & working for life.S'pore = no Life...
ReplyDeleteAs the name goes Singapore Inc, they view themselves as a private corporation. So it is no surprise they are after P/L and ministers are measured based on how much money they earn or save for the ministries. So with this model, they privatized the hospitals, transport systems, utilities, even education etc..do you expect the goverment to really care about non-money making activities? While they cannot be obvious in wanting to spend as little as possible on the necessities;esp class c wards they as always, cleverly guise their policies so that they sound logical on the surface but the public at large has no way to verify.
ReplyDeleteSo there we have it, whatever subsidy they claim they are providing actually market subsidies, not cost subsidies- because cost subsidies means losing money!
The goverment has lose touch with the ppl. As much as they like to say they are in tune, do you really think the million dollars ministers can empathize with workers on the group esp those of lower income? Have they ever lead a life where 3 meals are not guaranteed or lived in a small flat that houses 7 person sharing a single toilet? Just like any management structure, they relied on the feedbacks of grassroot leaders or MP on the plight of the less fortunate, which unforunate may not be representative of the true situation.... esp ppl like Interjit Singh, do you think he will fiercely fight the money (from the government) which you or yr constituency needs for whatever cause?
Since it is well known by now the goverment want to spend as little money on ppl under the guise of becoming a welfare state, do you think yr PAP MP will not hestitate to fight for yr plight? They will only communicate good news to yr million dollars ministers who of course gladly believe that Singaporeans are well to do and therefore continue to put up policies that will make more money for the goverment - a yardstick in which they are measured.
So there we have in a nutshell why the rising cost of living in Singapore as long as they continue to price the road, land, transport etc based on information they received or choose to believe.
That is why we need opposition MPs to provide the alternative view or information for the goverment to make right policies or at least not without serious considerations.... Not from a bunch of characters that choose to be in the party good books by filtering true needs of the ppl.
So this election., we are not talking about changing PAP goverment but to have alternative voices and opinions in the parliament. It also provides check and balances on the goverment. Pls remember ABSOLUTE POWER, ABSOLUTE CORRUPT
uned
The answer is obviously "NO". Otherwise it will be widely publicised by the MSM and opps will be knocked out cold. To be fair, Mah is not to be blamed as he is not in-charge when they decided to transfer cheaply acquired farm lands at market price to make a case that HDB flats were heavily subsidised. I remembered there were debates between Dhanabalan and Chiam many years ago. Chiam was challenged to build flats too. I believed we have unwittingly fall into this "creative accounting" trap. Remember Dhana was and is still a banker/financial guy. It works for sometime when economy was booming and every Singaporean was making money out of applying/speculating on HDB flats. Long waiting queque + migration from Hongkong made things worst. I think pap policy makers and MM realised this after the 1997 financial crisis. I believe MM said something like it is unfortunate but it is irreversible now. The collapse of the HBD housing value will sent pap out of office immediately, 75% owned them.
ReplyDelete