Suck your money dry - this iswhat this nation is all about !
-
Tell me again, who is the person that makes the decision to vote?Originally posted by Cindyfeh:Tell me again. What are GRC zonings for? -
This has been the prevalent strategy of the Ruling elite all the while: Give with left hand, take with the right.
Lowering of COE was just an excuse to entice more ppl to buy certs and contribute to the govt's coffers, all this while they actively promote public transportation, allow price hikes and implement the ERP system to address the 'traffic congestion problem'.
If they can transfer as much costs to citizens as possible, they will do so. Only in the last decade have an increasing number of ppl started to notice the familar trend of offering glossed-over words like 'rebates' or 'grants', only to legislate more cost sucking measures to balance the account books. -
Is Singapore truly so short of 'LAND' ?
Travel around Singapore, and one can see big plots of land that remains vacant, sparsely populated, and still waiting for development - but only to the highest bidder for that plot of land.
Hong Kong has land that is much more then Singapore, and the density of population is even greater, but HOUSING is very dependent on PRIVATE developments, and not much is provided by the Government.
Private developers have no Social Programs but only driven by PROFITS, which explains for the higher price of housing in Hong Kong than Singapore.
Furthermore, the Hong Kong Dollar is about FOUR times lower in value than the Singapore Dollar - SGD1.00 is HKG4.65; this will only mean that raw materials will have to cost more in Hong Kong than in Singapore - as Hong Kong is like Singapore, all materials are imported.
Singaporeans were led to believe that with a STRONGER SINGAPORE DOLLAR, we can achieve a higher STANDARD OF LIVING, and will have better control to moderate our COST OF LIVING by importing all our agricultural needs from the regional neighbors and further.
The Malaysian Ringgit is TWO TIMES LESSER in value than Singapore - SGD1.00 is RM2.24 - and with salaries that are twice smaller in value than Singapore's wages, most Malaysians could still afford to buy a terrace house (no HDB programs), with enough low value Ringgit left to buy an imported car, have an occassional overseas holiday, save for their child to be educated overseas, enjoy LIFE shopping for cheaper products available at Giant, Carre Fours, and cheaper IMPORTED movies (paid in RM) at their Cineplex housed in large Malls and Shopping Complexes that are equal to Singapore's.
After FORTY YEARS, and despite our strong Singapore Dollar, the majority of Singaporeans still have to work doubly hard and do not seem to have progressed any further from the first spot that our fathers have started from.
Our grandfathers and fathers have either to work in big Europeans trading or banking firms, or small factories, or involve themselves in trading by travelling in the region or further.
At least in their times, FORTY YEARS AGO, they could afford to buy two storey terrace house in community housing areas of Joo Chiat, Katong, Siglap, Bukit Merah, Tiong Bahru, Jalan Besar, Sembawang - and with a mortgage that is fully paid up in TEN YEARS - and with smaller wage amounts.
After FORTY YEARS, with a bigger population - (which was suppose to pose a nightmare for the LKY administration, hence the Two Child Family Planning Policy that is now admitted to be wrong) - but a STRONGER DOLLAR, Singaporeans are still moving in the same directions, working to pay a mortgage.
The mortgage require TWENTY YEARS to be fully serviced - despite a stronger SINGAPORE DOLLAR.
NINETY PERCENT of Singaporeans work to pay the HDB (or private housing) mortgage; keep ourselves alive by buying from NTUC Fairprice; pay for transportation by MRT or SMRT, or SBS, or TIBS, or Comfort; entertain ourselves on Sentosa Island or NTUC 'East End' or 'Downtown', or SAFRA, or Orchid Country Club; glued our eyes to TV programs and Newspapers that are both controlled by GLCs; pay our utilities that are provided by GLCs - from electricity, water, garbage collection - even though these are supposed to have been Privatised.
Even drinking Tiger Beer and some other Beers, or Coca Cola and some other soft drinks, the money will flow back into the coffers of Temasek.
Not forgetting also the innocuous ring of our handphones and home phones, OUR hard earned money are paid to SingTel, M-1, and Starhub; while the Internet Service Providers are also similarly dominated by SingTel, Starhubs and Pacific - all of which are also GLCs.
Is it little wonder that the Ruling Party is so keen to suppress the rise of any Opposition Party, to threaten their political-economic control, and continue with the lucrative enterprise of governing Singapore ? -
In western countries, westerners usually pay higher wages to offset the higher income taxes and inflation. In addition, the indirect taxes are slightly lower than here.Originally posted by TooFree:Honestly, I only know a bit here and there lar... but living standard is dependent on few factors. You can tell by their currency rate measured against US dollar.
Yeah. I do agree that SG is hard to survive... but if you chose to get out, it really depends on where you want to go. To live comfortable, you can only choose those developing country. (like Msia) Developed countries (like Aust, US & UK) are roughly the same in SG.
And while living standards are higher, the interest rates from the bank are slightly lower than interest rates here- from both the local banks and CPF compound interest rates.
Plus a HDB average price can be also be equal to the price of a one-storey private house with a car garage in the sub-urban areas(which is actually bigger in size) in some areas of Australia and US.*
*Watch the Desperate Housewives on TV? See those houses? That's what I meant.*
But I do believe the UK is much more expensive, firstly due to the conversion currency rate. Each pound is worth S$3.00- so it's damn expensive- even if you decide to stay in Scotland or Wales rather than London, Oxford or Birmingham. -
Originally posted by timothytsgsg:
If you work in Singapore, and earn $3000 a month, your wage is only worth 1000 UK Pounds in UK.
In western countries, westerners usually pay higher wages to offset the higher income taxes and inflation. In addition, the indirect taxes are slightly lower than here.
And while living standards are higher, the interest rates from the bank are slightly lower than interest rates here- from both the local banks and CPF compound interest rates.
Plus a HDB average price can be also be equal to the price of a one-storey private house with a car garage in the sub-urban areas(which is actually bigger in size) in some areas of Australia and US.
But I do believe the UK is much more expensive, firstly due to the conversion currency rate. Each pound is worth S$3.00- so it's damn expensive- even if you decide to stay in Scotland or Wales rather than London, Oxford or Birmingham.
However, if you work in UK, you will probably be earning 3000 UK Pounds and will probably find that living in UK is not that expensive.
Travelling around, I always visit the MacDonalds, and find that a Big Mac is probably the best measure of the Cost of Living, AND in some narrow way an indicative of the Standard of Living.
A Big Mac set meal in Singapore cost SGD5.95, in Malaysia - it cost RM8.75, in UK today it probably cost 3.85 Pounds.
It should cost the Malaysian more, as the average salary in Malaysia is probably between RM1,000 to RM3,000.
The value of the meal when paid in the respective currencies that you earn is more important. -
Originally posted by Atobe:
a typical macdonald's meal costs 5.95 euros at least in paris..so don't complain so much because you ain't seen the most expensive yet.
If you work in Singapore, and earn $3000 a month, your wage is only worth 1000 UK Pounds in UK.
However, if you work in UK, you will probably be earning 3000 UK Pounds and will probably find that living in UK is not that expensive.
Travelling around, I always visit the MacDonalds, and find that a Big Mac is probably the best measure of the Cost of Living, AND in some [b]narrow way an indicative of the Standard of Living.
A Big Mac set meal in Singapore cost SGD5.95, in Malaysia - it cost RM8.75, in UK today it probably cost 3.85 Pounds.
It should cost the Malaysian more, as the average salary in Malaysia is probably between RM1,000 to RM3,000.
The value of the meal when paid in the respective currencies that you earn is more important.
[/b]
-
Originally posted by Atobe:
If the UK company pays you 3 times the amount that the Singapore company pays for the same amount of work...I say the UK company is going to go out of business. And the cost of living in UK depends on which city. If you live in London.....
If you work in Singapore, and earn $3000 a month, your wage is only worth 1000 UK Pounds in UK.
However, if you work in UK, you will probably be earning 3000 UK Pounds and will probably find that living in UK is not that expensive.
Travelling around, I always visit the MacDonalds, and find that a Big Mac is probably the best measure of the Cost of Living, AND in some [b]narrow way an indicative of the Standard of Living.
A Big Mac set meal in Singapore cost SGD5.95, in Malaysia - it cost RM8.75, in UK today it probably cost 3.85 Pounds.
It should cost the Malaysian more, as the average salary in Malaysia is probably between RM1,000 to RM3,000.
The value of the meal when paid in the respective currencies that you earn is more important.
[/b] -
What are you talking about?Originally posted by kheldorin:If the UK company pays you 3 times the amount that the Singapore company pays for the same amount of work...I say the UK company is going to go out of business. And the cost of living in UK depends on which city. If you live in London.....
UK companies don't necessarily have to pay 3 times more than SG companies. The fact that they pay in pounds already makes it 3 times more.
Besides, although they pay workers more, they rake in more cash too because of their general cost of living and larger population / demand..
And just one question, how do you think foreign companies / MNCs prospered despite paying their workers way more than what the average company pays in Singapore? Shouldn't they have gone out of business already, according to your theory?
I guess if you do go out of business because of that, the only thing you can put the blame on is your own incompetence. -
For every Hong Kong where people pay more, there are 30 or more nations who offers cheap / value for money housing..Originally posted by TooFree:You mention the labour and materials cost are cheaper than the cost we paid for the flat. Yeah you are right .... but what happen if you compare it with HK, KL where people pay even more.
30:1 ratio... So..
Still think it's wise comparing Singapore with the minority that offers more expensive housing? -
Hmm.. its never wise to compare among countries, as each has its own unique identity.. but HK is a closer proximate of SG than any other to compare with woh..Originally posted by loosefuse:For every Hong Kong where people pay more, there are 30 or more nations who offers cheap / value for money housing..
30:1 ratio... So..
Still think it's wise comparing Singapore with the minority that offers more expensive housing? -
You see, I was just wondering why SG is unable to model themselves after the majority rather than the minority like HK.. By the way, if HK is a closer proximate of SG, so are the big cities in developed countries where "land is scarce and the population density is high, blah blah blah". Now, why then are the cost of housing in these cities not as high as SG's?Originally posted by TooFree:Hmm.. its never wise to compare among countries, as each has its own unique identity.. but HK is a closer proximate of SG than any other to compare with woh..
I don't agree about all developed countires being the same. Firstly, people get paid MORE in developed countries like US and Australia. Yes, their taxes are higher but the extra money they get balances their books..
Anyone who says their housing is more expensive compared to SG's must be kidding. Check properties selling Internet sites, and see for yourself. A house that can cost up to millions here only cost a couple hundred of thousands over there. -
in fact, developed countries are no better then us.. As for australia, their income tax is up to 47% taxable and their GST is at 10%.. So everyday, about 57% of their hard earned money go to government pocket.. As for their properties, it is quite cheap.. a landed property can cost $200,000 in a sub urban area.. a global finanical consultant can earned up to $130,000 but about $70,000 goes to the government and the rest have to pay for food, transport and so forth.. i could guess that how much they can really get back..
UK have the same situation but they are more on GST.. -
Originally posted by geran76:
Even though the tax rate in Australia maybe high, much of the tax money goes to provide low-cost medical services and social support schemes that do not tax the Australian any more.
in fact, developed countries are no better then us.. As for australia, their income tax is up to 47% taxable and their GST is at 10%.. So everyday, about 57% of their hard earned money go to government pocket.. As for their properties, it is quite cheap.. a landed property can cost $200,000 in a sub urban area.. a global finanical consultant can earned up to $130,000 but about $70,000 goes to the government and the rest have to pay for food, transport and so forth.. i could guess that how much they can really get back..
UK have the same situation but they are more on GST..
An Australian will not pay as much for medical attention when they visit a public hospital, as the bulk of the bill will be TRULY subsidised - unlike in Singapore, where the bill is inflated and will show a subsidy of 70%, while one has still to pay the remaining 30% that can wipe out one's Medisave Account.
There is a safety net to help Australians get through natural disasters, and economic crisis that result in retrenchments and joblessness.
Singaporeans cannot even draw on our own CPF to help ourselves during retrenchment, and long term joblessness; and there are no similar social security net to cushion us during the crisis period.
Sweden has the highest tax rate on earth, and it is not even a Communist Country; but its Citizens enjoy a very high standard of medical and social welfare schemes that protect every Swede from cradle to grave. -
Thse countries have humanitariun values. They respect human rights and welfare. Unlike in Singapore where the selfish Rich only care about their own stomachs.Originally posted by Atobe:Even though the tax rate in Australia maybe high, much of the tax money goes to provide low-cost medical services and social support schemes that do not tax the Australian any more.
An Australian will not pay as much for medical attention when they visit a public hospital, as the bulk of the bill will be TRULY subsidised - unlike in Singapore, where the bill is inflated and will show a subsidy of 70%, while one has still to pay the remaining 30% that can wipe out one's Medisave Account.
There is a safety net to help Australians get through natural disasters, and economic crisis that result in retrenchments and joblessness.
Singaporeans cannot even draw on our own CPF to help ourselves during retrenchment, and long term joblessness; and there are no similar social security net to cushion us during the crisis period.
Sweden has the highest tax rate on earth, and it is not even a Communist Country; but its Citizens enjoy a very high standard of medical and social welfare schemes that protect every Swede from cradle to grave. -
Ya.Originally posted by Love Story:Thse countries have humanitariun values. They respect human rights and welfare. Unlike in Singapore where the selfish Rich only care about their own stomachs. -
You know they're sucking your CPF dry when they say "no cash? never mind got CPF?".
-
You absolutely right~! The richest and most powerful men in singapore only care for their own stomachs and power corrupted.Originally posted by Love Story:Thse countries have humanitariun values. They respect human rights and welfare. Unlike in Singapore where the selfish Rich only care about their own stomachs. -
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Sg_Review/message/1743
Mellanie Hewlitt
Singapore Review
22 Jan 2005
Why & How The PAP Financially Handcuffs Singaporeans.
You know about the COE and HDB scams. But have you ever wondered what the 2
biggest financial handcuffs of the avarege Singaporean are?
Answer: a) The House and b) The Car.
These are essentially fixed illiquid assets which cannot be easily taken
off-shore. And these are also the two biggest items on the average Singaporeans
list of expenses. They provide a stable income/revenue stream for the bloated
coffers of the government bureucracy and also physically shackles citizens to
this island.
The following commentary by Robert Schwartz, chief economist for a strategic
research unit in Australia, was written as part of a Singapore Studies project.
For more information on the project and other articles, please visit JGNews at
www.jamesgomeznews.com
Read on and discover how and why the PAP Government financially handcuffs the
average Singaporean.
---------------------------------------------------------
Singaporean spending not central to Singapore economy
by Robert Schwartz, 20 Jan 2005
Writing about Singapore's economic outlook is boring.
It's not that there is nothing to say, it's that there
is nothing to say about Singapore itself. A pertinent
discussion of Singapore's near term prospects for the
first half of 2005 has to start with the effects of
the tsunami. This then would segue over to the actions
of America's Federal Reserve Bank, which in turn would
be followed by a pithy, yet substantive, look at the
global electronics cycle.
Where do the people of Singapore fit into this
analysis? Hopefully as readers of this piece, but
that's about as far as it goes.
In 2001, the Ministry of Trade and Industry published
a paper that looked at the four primary, long term
drivers of Singapore's economy. The number one
influence was growth in the United States. Number
two? Growth in the economies of Indonesia and
Malaysia. Third was global semiconductor sales. And
rounding out the top four was domestic construction.
But wait, you might say, what about Singaporeans' love
of shopping? Certainly that has to count for
something? You're right it does. The problem is that
Singaporeans love of shopping is usually done
someplace other than Singapore. The fastest growing
component of private consumption over the past decade
or so has been Resident Expenditure Abroad.
Of the spending done in Singapore, the fastest growing
type of retailer (by far) has been motor vehicle
dealers. From 1997 to the third quarter of 2004,
dealership sales had increased by a total of nearly
260%, not including the effects of inflation. The
next fastest growing category was supermarkets, which
grew by a total of nearly 32%. Overall, non-motor
vehicle retail turnover grew, excluding inflation, by
a total of 7.1% from 1997 through September 2004.
The key to Singapore's retail sector is not the
average Singaporean. The key to retail in Singapore
is the overseas visitor. If you want to get a handle
on how well the sector is doing, look at the growth in
visitor numbers. These have traditionally led the
retail numbers.
So again, where does this leave the people of
Singapore? In their government housing units voting
for the PAP every so often and that's about it. As
far as making the economy move forward, the average
Singaporean is a non-event. And as such has little
say in the political environment. No economic clout =
no political constituency = no audible political
voice.
The consumer's share of Singapore's economy is around
42%. This compares to about 55% in Japan, a country
notorious for saving, and close to 70% in the United
States. It is not coincidental that the average
American, who is such a vital part of the US economy,
has such a central role in the political sphere.
In fact, the average consumer in the United States has
more power over the direction of the Singapore economy
than does the average Singaporean. It is the
continually increased spending on ever more
gadget-filled electronics equipment or on a new
lifestyle drug done by a typical American that drives
the sales which drive Singapore's production.
To be fair to the government, it knows that any money
spent on boosting the consumption of average
Singaporeans is money that will very quickly find its
way to foreign shores. As such, the PAP has decided
that it would prefer not to spend its hard-earned tax
revenues boosting the local economies of Batam, Johore
or Bangkok.
This is also why the government's interest in the
domestic consumer economy is limited to construction.
This is a section of the economy that can't be taken
out of the country. The problem here is that by the
mid-1990s the residential property was way ahead of
the average Singaporean in terms of price,
affordability and location. As a result, the property
sector took a serious dive. Furthermore, neither the
public nor private housing markets have come close to
hitting the highs reached in 1996/1997.
The problem with this emphasis on property is that it
has handcuffed many Singaporeans. A typical private
residence bought between the beginning of 1994 and the
beginning of 1998 has, at best, not appreciated. At
worst, this homeowner could have held onto this asset
for over a decade and have it being worth less today
than when it was purchased. This means that a
Singaporean family could been paying off a mortgage
that was higher than the value of the property itself.
This negative equity is extremely depressing, both
economically and psychologically.
Alright, so where does this leave us? Talking about
things far from Singapore's borders. And, quite
frankly, it's a bit boring, not to mention impolite,
to talk about other people's lives instead of your
own. But when your lives don't count for much,
economically, there just isn't much point to a conversation. -
Anyone understand the logic behind tis?
I am buying a house & applying for housing loan. I was just told by the bank tat I cannot use my lawyer (small lawyer firm, have been with me for >10 yrs), must use Lee & Lee. I turn to another bank aso same condition. they are two of the big four banks in Singapore. -
As far as I know, you have every legal right to appoint your own lawyers. After all, your lawyer is there to ensure your interests are adequately protected. Similarly for the bank, they will usually have their own set of lawyers handling the legal documentation for your mortgage loan.Originally posted by taurian:Anyone understand the logic behind tis?
I am buying a house & applying for housing loan. I was just told by the bank tat I cannot use my lawyer (small lawyer firm, have been with me for >10 yrs), must use Lee & Lee. I turn to another bank aso same condition. they are two of the big four banks in Singapore.
However, in order to save costs, you may request to use the bank's lawyers as your own ie. they will be acting for both sides. In this way, some legal costs may be waived since the lawyers are acting for both parties. Note also, that since the lawyers are acting for you too, they are legally required to make sure everything is done properly for you.
As it is, the mortgage documentation / mortgage loan terms and conditions are usually pretty straight forward and standard.
It is ultimately up to the individual and the bank to negotiate and decide what they want. Go check with them on the norm. -
tis is not the case leh. i was just told by the banks I applied for the loan tat I HAVE to go through their lawyers who are L n L. I'm still calling a few banks to check. My lawyer is resigned to tis.Originally posted by charlize:As far as I know, you have every legal right to appoint your own lawyers. After all, your lawyer is there to ensure your interests are adequately protected. Similarly for the bank, they will usually have their own set of lawyers handling the legal documentation for your mortgage loan.
However, in order to save costs, you may request to use the bank's lawyers as your own ie. they will be acting for both sides. In this way, some legal costs may be waived since the lawyers are acting for both parties. Note also, that since the lawyers are acting for you too, they are legally required to make sure everything is done properly for you.
As it is, the mortgage documentation / mortgage loan terms and conditions are usually pretty straight forward and standard.
It is ultimately up to the individual and the bank to negotiate and decide what they want. Go check with them on the norm.
Is it the new rule for mortgage loans now, tat y must use the banks' lawyers? -
If you have millions of dollars kept in their banks as fixed deposits, you think they will insist you use their lawyers?Originally posted by taurian:tis is not the case leh. i was just told by the banks I applied for the loan tat I HAVE to go through their lawyers who are L n L. I'm still calling a few banks to check. My lawyer is resigned to tis.
Is it the new rule for mortgage loans now, tat y must use the banks' lawyers? -
to show the developed world that we are democratic... that's all...Originally posted by shade343:Tell me again. What are elections for? -
nothin'.. for show only...Originally posted by Cindyfeh:Tell me again. What are GRC zonings for? -
But they own the land after it is paid.Originally posted by vito_corleone:in japan, you have to take a 90 year-3 generation housing loan to afford a house. 