TR EMERITUS

The cash-over-valuation (COV) of resale HDB flats has shot through the roof with some estates like Bishan and Toa Payoh fetching median COVs of above $40,000. According to a Straits Times report today, the median COV is now way above the record $25,000 in the first quarter with many flat owners asking for COVs of between $30,000 and $40,000. When interviewed by the Straits Times, PropNex Chief Executive Mohamed Ismail noted that there are few first-time home buyers in the resale market. "These buyers are queueing for flats directly from HDB, which are more affordable. The resale market is also propped up by PRs who cannot buy new flats, but need a home urgently," he added. Though public housing is supposedly reserved for Singaporeans only, PRs are allowed to purchase HDB flats in the open market. As many PRs are already well-established professionals to begin with, they are able to pay higher than market prices for the resale flats thereby jacking up the prices in the process. A Straits Times article last year reported an Indonesian PR who forked out a shocking $653,000 for a 4-room resale flat in Queenstown though he could well afford a condominium. Many PRs also see HDB flats as an investment which they can make a quick buck by selling them upon leaving Singapore. Besides PRs, some new citizens have also benefitted from the PAP's pro-foreigner housing policies by subletting their flats while staying in private properties. There was an outcry in cyberspace lately when a new citizen from India and YPAP leader Sinha Shekhar boasted about renting out his resale flat for income on the REACH Facebook: [Source: REACH Facebook] In the above exchange, Mr Sinha Shekhar, who works as an occupational therapist at Thye Hua Kwan Hospital, wrote that he paid “really high” for a resale HDB flat and the rent he is collecting is not enough to pay for the bank instalments. Mr Sinha should stop complaining. There are many Singaporeans, including NSmen who are unable to afford a roof over their heads thanks to the sky-rocketing prices of HDB flats. Despite widespread disgruntlement on the ground, PAP National Development Minister Mah Bow Tan continues to insist that HDB flats are "affordable" to Singaporeans and chided home buyers for being "fussy" and having "unrealistic expectations."     Please join our Facebook page here and invite your friends to do so to create awareness of the current affairs affecting Singaporeans. Please use our online web form to contact us.  Read More →

据外电报道，俄罗斯一家国际房地产咨询公司最新公布的研究报告显示，全球36个城市的工薪阶层当“房奴”的时间存在很大不同。以用工资购买一套70平方米的公寓为标准，柏林人付清全部房款的时间最短，平均只有3年，而新加坡人所需时间最长，是柏林人的12倍。 戈登洛克公司媒体部负责人表示，此项研究的数据来源于该公司设在各地的房产代理商提供的当地房价和人均收入，研究共进行了3个月时间。研究者们以购买一处地处城郊住宅区、面积为70平方米公寓的平均售价为标准，研究选择的年收入数据也是多国大城市的中层收入水平居民的平均年收入。该负责人表示，公司此举是为了真实了解世界各大城市居民的住房开支情况，把住房开支与工作收入挂钩，用工作年限来衡量住房价格。 根据戈登洛克公司的统计，柏林市民只需连续工作3年，用攒下的工资就可以购买一套标准住房。柏林人如此迅速地就能攒够钱买房，主要是由于柏林的房价与其他欧洲大城市相比实在是便宜，当地普通住房的售价每平方米大约只有1000美元，而大部分欧洲国家首都的房价远远高出这个价。欧洲其他首都城市的居民购买一套标准住房攒钱的时间都比柏林居民长，稍微接近的赫尔辛基、维也纳等城市也都高出柏林一倍以上，大部分欧洲大城市的居民购买一套标准住房仍需连续工作10到14年。 在戈登洛克公司调查的部分亚洲城市中，泰国曼谷人攒钱买房的时间最短，只需不到7年，尽管曼谷居民的工资很低，但当地的普通房价也相当便宜，每平方米只有500多美元。日本东京的房价仅次于瑞士苏黎世，每平方米高达7000美元，所以年收入可观的东京人也需要攒近16年时间的工资才能负担一套普通住房中国香港和韩国首尔的居民买房的时间则更长一些，需要约20年。 相比之下，新加坡人当“房奴”的时间则最漫长，与其他城市相比，房价高，收入却不高，造成新加坡人至少需要攒36.4年的工资才能买一套房子。位于大洋洲的悉尼房价也较高，约6000美元一平米，因此当地居民攒钱买房的时间也不短，需要16.3年。 免责声明：本文仅代表作者个人观点，与凤凰网无关。其原创性以及文中陈述文字和内容未经本站证实，对本文以及其中全部或者部分内容、文字的真实性、完整性、及时性本站不作任何保证或承诺，请读者仅作参考，并请自行核实相关内容。 Source: http://finance.ifeng.com/hk/sckx/20100713/2401891.shtml  Read More →

OPINION The recent case in which opposition leader Dr Chee Soon Juan was fined for making a "speech" without a permit in 2006 is another clear cut case of abuse of state resources by the PAP to persecute the opposition and to intimidate the citizenry into silence. The long-suffering Secretary-General of the Singapore Democratic Party was selling his party newsletters to residents of Bukit Panjang when he stopped to give them a short address to persuade them to buy them which was caught on video by accompanying officers from the Singapore police force. Dr Chee was simply doing what the other street vendors are doing - hawking their wares to the public. If doing so constitutes an offence, then many of them would have been hauled up to court already. The fact that the Singapore police gave Dr Chee "preferential treatment" and filmed his address specifically for the prosecution to convict him in court is sufficient proof of double standards in the application of the law. Do we see the Singapore police filming the addresses or "speeches" made by ordinary street hawkers as well? How much money, time and resources have been spent on Dr Chee's case so far? The incident took place in 2006 and the sentencing only took place 4 years later now. Does the police seriously need to go to such extent to punish Dr Chee? Last week, an opposition politician from another political party was issued a summon by the National Environment Agency for selling the party's newsletter without a permit. Mr Christopher Neo, the Vice-President of the National Solidarity Party has refused to compound the offence and will be charged in court in August. NSP has written to NEA to seek clarifications, but they are unlikely to receive any reply from them, such is the typical high-handedness of PAP-led organizations. Like in Dr Chee's case, the exact nature of the offence is kept deliberately unclear and vague to allow each individual judge to interpret the law to his/her own discretion. Had the offenders been ordinary Singaporeans with no political inclinations, it is highly unlikely that the authorities will bother to go through so much including negative press publicity to implement the law. Dr Chee and Mr Neo are probably "chickens" to be slayed to frighten the "monkeys" to deter others from following suit. The continued criminalization of legitimate political activities by the PAP smacks of third world partisan politics and is impeding the opposition's efforts to reach out to the masses. Making public speeches, talking to the people and selling newsletters are part and parcel of grassroots works for politicians to reach out to the masses. These are common occurrences in other Asian democracies such as Japan, South Korea, Hong Kong and Taiwan and no permits are needed. In fact, the police are often deployed to protect the protestors from hurting themselves in Hong Kong and Taiwan which are often rocked by street rallies and protests once every few weeks. It is a shame that instead of engaging the opposition in a public televised debate, the PAP resorted to hiding behind the power of the law to persecute them. The PAP should not forget that it was once in the opposition too and if PAP strongman Lee Kuan Yew was unable to communicate with the people then, the PAP would never have won the 1959 elections and formed the government. Singaporeans should stand up and send a strong signal to the PAP that they have enough of it abuse state resources funded by taxpayers to serve its own partisan interests. The Singapore police is supposed to protect Singaporeans and NOT the PAP's political fortunes.     Please join our Facebook page here and invite your friends to do so to create awareness of the current affairs affecting Singaporeans. Please use our online web form to contact us.  Read More →