TR EMERITUS

Dear Ms Chua,   I refer to your article dated 20 Apr 2010.   You said it is disingenuous to either 'do something drastic' or 'do nothing' because either action would cause the majority of Singaporeans who are neither first-time home owners nor super rich to be worse off. It is indeed disingenuous of you to think that the majority of Singaporeans aren't first-time home owners. There are 3.2 million Singaporeans in 900,000 households. That means there are 2.3 million Singaporeans who do not as yet own homes and would thus be first-time home owners sooner or later. In other words, first-time home owners (sooner or later) outnumber existing home owners by more than 2 to 1. Thus, if the ingenuous thing to do is to make the majority better off, it follows that we should 'do something drastic' for current and future first-time home owners since they are in the majority.   You said the government's handling of the property market has been a lot more right than wrong. There is not a lot of truth to what you say unless you can back it up with a lot more fact. HDB prices shot through the roof in 1997 and are shooting through the roof again. Two sudden spikes in a short span of twelve years and you call that a lot more right than wrong? How much more wrong can we get? One spike every other year?   'Short-term glitch' is a poor excuse for something that could essentially have been avoided had the government had better foresight.   A lot is not going right in housing, no thanks to the government's insistence that the resale market be treated as a 'free' and peggin of new flat prices to resale flat prices which essentially exposes new flat prices to 'free' market price fluctuations.   Yes, the government has turned housing into a social policy that has successfully enslaved the populace into ceaseless working for ever more expensive housing throughout their lives. Home ownership is not just a national objective but also a burden to be borne by all nationals.   It is not necessarily true that pandering to those who have been priced out of the market would be a great disservice to existing home owners. Many existing home owners have children who would someday become first-time home owners. Ensuring that buyers today are not priced out of the market will help ensure that the children of home owners today will also not be priced out of the market in the future. Because if prices keep increasing out of hand, the unaffordability issues of today will become exacerbated and compounded tomorrow. By arresting the unaffordability issues today, we are in fact helping to alleviate future unaffordability issues.   You said we should not disgruntle the majority who are the 900,000 home owners even if it means vexing the 30,000 young couples who set up homes each year. But majority refers not to the 900,000 home owners but to the 2.3 million children of the 900,000 home owners who would eventually set up homes. It is they whom we should not disgruntle, it is they whom we should not vex.   Sudden spikes in HDB prices show that Singapore hasn't got the big picture right. The socialist provision of mass housing at capitalist prices is a double whammy for Singaporeans. We are forced into ceaseless queuing much like queuing for basic essentials such as bread and butter in previously socialist economies. At least, our socialist comrades paid socialist prices for socialist goods. Here, we are paying capitalist prices for socialist goods instead.   It is not correct to say that 90% of households can afford homes since a significant number of them will have no money left for retirement after having poured all their hard earned money into their homes. These people will be forced to sell their homes back to the government and will be left with no homes in the end. How can you call the home affordable when it gobbles up all your hard earned money leaving you with nothing for retirement? How can a house be affordable if buying it means having to pay for it with money meant for feeding you in old age?   You said new flats are not allowed to soar freely in tandem with a bullish market. That's bullshit. New flats are pegged to resale flats and soar as freely as resale flats do.   You said market forces allow home owners to realise the value of their assets. But when the price of your asset shoots up by $100,000 overnight without you doing anything to enhance your asset, has your asset changed in anyway? No, your asset hasn't changed in any way and is still the same asset as before albeit not as new and less pristine. So its value hasn't increased yet its price has shot up by $100,000. This is no different from the price of rice shooting up overnight due to shortage in supply even though it is still the same rice. This is not realising the value of assets, this is hyper inflation.     Thank you     Ng Kok Lim  Read More →

JURONG POLICE DIVISION HQ NO 2 JURONG WEST AVENUE 5 SINGAPORE 649482 MAY 29, 2010 Dear Officers, I reported a case of outrage of modesty late last year and until recently, had received no word from the Singapore Police Force as to their progress on the case, despite the extensive amount of time they had required to complete their investigation, and my provision of all necessary information and relevant contact details. A week after the officer’s extremely polite invitation of the accused in the police car to the station, his feigning ignorance – boasting of it to friends, which was later related to me – I had called up the officer in charge to inquire about his progress, questions which he avoided, anxious to end the conversation, with nothing but constant reminders that I would need to be summoned down frequently, obviously intending for me to withdraw my case. I had since forgotten all about it, but not long after Chinese New Year, perhaps 2 weeks or more, the accused returned to his home country, in China, wishing me a pleasant year, and mocking the stupidity of Singaporeans, and while I do not want to generalize, I cannot but acknowledge the incompetency and inefficiency (and if I may be so bold, their illiteracy) of our protectors, and question their activities over the past one year. Half a year ago my friend requested help from the Police with regards to a landlord-tenancy case, and was promptly informed by the counter staff that they could not enforce contracts, but that she had to seek legal assistance from an attorney. It seems like these are not isolated incidents, since I know of many helpless people who feel nothing but frustration towards the police. Time and again the Force has shown that with the exception of the prevention of violence, and perhaps deterrence through mere presence, they are quite incapable of proper intervention at the right place and time. Today I received a letter referenced J/20090507/2181(YeoTK), a notice to appear for an interview, demanding my compliance with the threat of a Warrant to secure my attendance. It seems to me that in all the different circumstances, whatever the case, accidents and similar, the Police Force makes it such that witnesses, the guilty and the innocent are constantly inconvenienced, such that patriotic citizens turn passive. The Singapore Police Force has both power and authority to act, and I believe, chose their careers among the Force with the intention of upholding justice and defending the rights of the people. Yours sincerely,   Sarah Seow Editor's Note: Letter is published verbatim with the exception of the email address which have been left out to protect the writer.  Read More →

OPINION It was reported in Channel News Asia yesterday that only 3 percent of the population is vaccinated against cervical cancer which is the second most common cancer among Singapore women after breast cancer. Cervical cancer vaccination is not compulsory in Singapore though it is recommended by the Ministry of Health. It is important to take note that while vaccination offers women a certain degree of protection against cervical cancer, routine PAP smear screening is strongly encouraged. Women between the ages of 25 and 65 should go for PAP smear screening once every three years unless their smears are abnormal which require a repeat smear to be done sooner or referral to a gynaecologist for follow-up. Cervical Cancer and HPV Cervical cancer is caused by the Human Papilloma Virus (HPV) which is transmitted commonly via sexual intercourse. There are over 40 subtypes of HPV which infect the genital tracts of both men and women, some of which can cause cervical cancer. Others cause benign skin lesions known as genital warts. Earlier age of sexual intercourse and multiple sex partners increase one's risk of getting cervical cancer. Who should get the vaccine? The Center of Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) of the United States recommends the HPV vaccine for 11 and 12 year-old girls. It is also recommended for girls and women age 13 through 26 years of age who have not yet been vaccinated or completed the vaccine series. The MOH guidelines are unclear in Singapore. However, age is not a contra-indicating factor for HPV vaccination. Though the immunological response is better in younger women, older women can mount an immune response and can be protected. Sexually active women can also take the vaccine. While HPV vaccination does not clear existing HPV infection, there is new data to suggest that women who have been previously infected, but has cleared themselves of the HPV virus will be protected in longer term as well when they are vaccinated. Vaccines available in Singapore There are currently two brands in Singapore: the bivalent vaccine Cervarix and quadrivalent vaccine Gardasil. Cervarix offers protection against HPV-16 and 18 which are responsible for about 65 to 70 percent of all cervical cancers while Gardasil protects against HPV-16, 18, 6 and 11. Both are taken in three doses at 0, 1 and 6 months apart. Each shot cost between $150 - $200. Some clinics offer a package for all three jabs at a lower cost. There is no evidence to suggest that one vaccine is better than the other to date. Gardasil has shown high protection rate for skin warts. Safety profile and efficacy Both vaccines have proven to be very safe so far, at least in Singapore. The injection site symptoms such as pain, redness and swelling are more common. The vaccines are not recommended for pregnant women yet due to limited studies done. Both vaccines are highly effective with a > 95% efficacy in women who were tested to be not infected with HPV vaccine-types at the time of vaccination. Should you go for the vaccination? Cervical cancer is the only cancer so far which can be protected via vaccination and it is the second most common cancer among Singapore women. The cost of vaccination is meager compared to the cost of cancer treatment. Prevention is better than cure.   References: 1. Center for Disease Control and Prevention (United States) 2. Singapore Family Physician (April - June 2010)  Read More →