TR EMERITUS

In a sign that the PAP is losing touch with the problems faced by ordinary Singaporeans, another PAP MP continues to insist that newly-weds have no problems obtaining a roof over their heads despite the evidence on the ground showing otherwise. When asked by fellow PAP MP Halimah Yacob in Parliament yesterday if HDB may revive a rental scheme for newly-weds who cannot get new flats, Parliamentary Secretary Maliki Osman emphasized that "newly-weds have enough housing options: they can stay with their parents, buy a resale flat or rent." "HDB will look into its feasibility, bearing in mind the housing needs of the different groups which it caters for," he added. The prices of HDB flats have nearly doubled in recent years due to limited supply of flats being built in the face of rising demand fueled by mass-immigration caused by the PAP's pro-foreigner and ultra-liberal immigration policies. While the prices of flats have sky-rocketed, the median salary of the average Singapore worker remains stagnant at $2,400 monthly, forcing many young Singaporeans to postpone marriage and starting a family of their own. Mr Maliki appeared unable to understand the fact that not many young couples can afford to buy resale flats or rent a place at today's astronomical prices. With the cost of living at an all-time high, the middle class is feeling increasingly squeezed with little savings to spare, let alone to have kids. HDB is solely at fault for the present predicament of many newly-weds by its failure to plan ahead by building more flats to meet the expected increase in housing demand. Only 3,183 flats were built in 2008 when Singapore accepted 20,000 new citizens and 90,000 PRs who were allowed to purchase resale flats in the open market by the PAP regime. [Source: HDB Financial Report 2008/2009] As there are insufficient new flats being built to meet the demands of both Singaporeans and the new citizens, many have to purchase flats in the resale market, thereby jacking up prices in the process. Below is a graph illustrating how the rise in the prices of resale flats coincides with the rise in the number of foreigners in Singapore between the years 2000 and 2008, courtesy of Kojakbt, the moderator of 3in1kopitiam: The PAP will probably wait till a few years later when even new flats are priced out of reach of ordinary Singaporeans before they will admit the severity of the problem they have created.     Debunking official myths of HDB flats series: 1 Myth 1: Singaporeans are “owners” of their HDB flats 2. Myth 2: HDB flats are “affordable” to most Singaporeans 3. Myth 3: Rising prices of HDB flats “generate” wealth for Singaporeans   Related articles: >> Mah Bow Tan: Immigrants not solely to blame for rising demand for housing >> Proposed housing rules for Singaporeans and foreigners >> Errant buyers of resale flats now face jail term >> New property rules a ploy to get foreigners to settle in Singapore >> Mah Bow Tan: Property boom in 2007 was “unexpected” >> Singaporeans complain about new housing rules to curb speculation >> HDB releases 3,000 flats in a single day >> Mah admits there is a property “bubble” evolving >> New rules to prevent private property owners from speculating in resale flats >> Mah blames Singaporeans for strong demand in public housing >> Mah: 16,000 BTO flats next year >> Median COVs hit a record high >> $300,000 for four-room BTO flats in Punggol >> Mah Bow Tan: HDB flats are still affordable to first time flat buyers >> Why Mah Bow Tan’s policy of high HDB flats is wrong >> Letter to Mah Bow Tan on HDB policies >> Singaporean want govt to allay anxiety over HDB leasehold >> Mah Bow Tan embarrassed by Reform Party’s Hazel Poa >> Mah Bow Tan: “Unrealistic” expectations to blame for unhappiness about flats >> Taiwanese PR paid record $ 650,000 for 4-room resale flat >> Grace Fu: PRs are helpful to HDB flat owners selling their flats >> HDB launches “traveling exhibition” to trumpet its achievements in the heartlands >> PAP to upgrade 12,000 HDB households ahead of next election >> Mah Bow Tan: We do not want flat prices to go down >> Prices of resale flats to rise further as PR quota reached >> Taiwanese PR offers $50k COV for resale flat >> Mah Bow Tan: PRs have minimal impact on resale flat prices >> No empirical evidence to suggest that public housing is affordable in Singapore >> When will Singapore’s property bubble burst? >> Why HDB is unable to reveal break down costs of new flats now >> HDB to consider introducing rules to curb property speculation >> HDB blames Singaporeans for not selecting flats when given the chance >> Singaporeans worried about retirement after depleting CPF to pay for over-priced HDB flats >> Mah Bow Tan acknowledged that rising HDB flat prices has sparked “fresh concerns” >> PM Lee: Govt does not have control over prices of resale flats” >> COVs of resale flats shooting through the roof >> HDB resale price index hit record high in 2009 >> Singaporean wants PRs to live in rented flats instead of buying resale flats >> Singaporeans wants PRs to be banned from selling HDB flats at a profit >> Shanmugam: Singaporeans likely culprits for driving up HDB flat prices >> Mah Bow Tan: HDB flats remain affordable >> Means testing for PRs to buy resale flats >> Immigration and public housing: should the govt or people plan ahead? >> Grace Fu: hard to predict demand for housing >> Indonesian PR bought 4-room flat at $653,000 >> Mah Bow Tan asks home buyers to be realistic >> PAP MP blames young couples who cannot get a flat for not planning ahead >> Home affordability: HDB versus the public >> Demand vs supply: so many applicants, so few flats >> Number of applicants exceed number of flats >> HDB to increase supply of flats >> Mah: don’t compare with prices in the past >> ERA: 40 per cent of HDB flat buyers are PRs     Please join our Facebook discussion on this article here and invite your friends to do so as well to raise awareness among fellow Singaporeans.  Read More →

A Senior Vice President of Singapore Press Holdings (SPH) has been sacked for receiving illegal payments and misappropriating shopping vouchers for the promotion activities of the Straits Times handled by his unit to which he voluntarily admitted, the Straits Times reports. In a brief statement released by SPH, it said that "Mr Peter Khoo Chong Meng, 45, senior vice president in the English and Malay Newspapers Division, is being investigated by police." It is not known how the scandal came to light. Mr Khoo also chaired the organizing committee in charge of raising funds for The Straits Times School Pocket Money Fund (STPMF). According to Mr Han Fook Kwang, editor of The Straits Times, he believes that STPMF was not involved and he reassured donors that they will maintain the integrity of the fund. SPH, which  is the only print media company allowed to operate in Singapore, was formed in 1984 after the amalgamation of the various papers in Singapore, bringing them completely under the control of the PAP. The present Chairman of SPH is Dr Tony Tan, a former minister of the PAP regime. The Singapore media is ranked a pathetic 133th position in terms of journalistic independence by respected international NGO Reporters without Borders last year.   Please join our Facebook discussion on this article here and invite your friends to do so as well to raise awareness among fellow Singaporeans.  Read More →

Dr Vivian was “kind” enough to offer a breakdown on how the 387 million was spent as the following $97 million: Technology $76 million: Upgrading of sports venues and equipment $45.5 million: Live broadcast plus staging of opening and closing ceremonies $7 million: Journey of Youth Olympic Flame across the globe, starting in Greece $44 million: Logistics $18 million: Security $14.3 million: Operational requirements $5.4 million: Culture and Education Programme $79.8 million: Miscellaneous costs such as medical services and training of volunteers 1) Technology costs 97 million, what was the technology used in the YOG?? Please give examples to be more convincing. 2)Upgrading of venues and equipment? What upgrading? You mean like to canvas which fell down? Or the substandard/school yard facilities which were commented on many times? 3)79.8 million on Miscellaneous costs? What was included in the miscellaneous costing, which totalled 20% of the total costs? Why was category like culture and education programme shown( which only contributed 1.4%) The figures given seems to be a little like creative accounting. Lastly how much of the money was awarded to local businesses, as if it can be proven that the money was diverted to the private sector and used to boost the economy, then the detractors have less things to say I guess.   Newhik  Read More →