Wooing the super-rich (from BT)
-
What's the point of defending those points when everything I say is lost on you. To you, everyone else is BS, only your points are valid and correct.Originally posted by Gazelle:Nah..I am not like you, I dont pretent to know something or be someone whom I am not.
As for you, you are just a sore loser who are desperately trying to redeem yourself from all the BS that I have highlighted. If you are capable, you should be defending all those BS point by point.
So why are we talking about Peter Drucker in the first place? Did I ask you about management? Did this thread talk about management? hmmm...or are you trying to talk about management because you want impress us with your management know-how irregardless of weather people are interested to listen.
If you insist of doing so, by all means go ahead. So what exactly about Peter Drucker or his teaching that you want to tell us?
I talked about Peter Drucker coz that is the basis of my point that what you are dealing with are opinions, not facts. But I supposed that point is lost on you again.
I wonder who is the loser?
The one who is desperately responding to every thread that he thinks he can answer, and ignoring those that he has no absolute idea about. -
Originally posted by Gazelle:
This is the greatest BS I have ever heard ever since I came to this forum
Nah..I am not like you, I dont pretent to know something or be someone whom I am not.
I refer you to your previous response. You said "Please don't embarass Peter Drucker..."
in the 1st place, you don't even know him (and whatever you know from now on, will only be your last minute research on 1 of the greatest management gurus of our times), and you pretend that you know him?
Now isn't that BS from the pot whom is calling everyone else black? -
There is a difference between giving your opinion and talking co.ck at your own will. Please get it right.Originally posted by soul_rage:This is the greatest BS I have ever heard ever since I came to this forum
I refer you to your previous response. You said "Please don't embarass Peter Drucker..."
in the 1st place, you don't even know him (and whatever you know from now on, will only be your last minute research on 1 of the greatest management gurus of our times), and you pretend that you know him?
Now isn't that BS from the pot whom is calling everyone else black?
By not engaging into a discussion about Peter Drucker you call that bullshi.t.
Common lah, Peter Drucker, like Michael Porter are names which any biz ad student in the university will know. So please dont try to make your little knowledge on management principle sound like a big deal.
Bloody loser!! -
did I not say I won't engage in a discussion?Originally posted by Gazelle:There is a difference between giving your opinion and talking co.ck at your own will. Please get it right.
By not engaging into a discussion about Peter Drucker you call that bullshi.t.
Common lah, Peter Drucker, like Michael Porter are names which any biz ad student in the university will know. So please dont try to make your little knowledge on management principle sound like a big deal.
Bloody loser!!
I have already mentioned what I wanted from his book
"People deal with opinions, not facts"
Its you whom did not get it, dear pot
And whatever you say now, is just last minute research work into the internet to know who he is. So pls don't make your last minute research work sound like a big deal
-
Now I am telling you your opinions highlighted below are full of crap. Thats my opinion about your opinions. If you are capable of standing by your opinion, I am sure you should be capable of defending them with facts and not trying to bring out some management bull crap to talk about opinion.Originally posted by soul_rage:did I not say I won't engage in a discussion?
I have already mentioned what I wanted from his book
"People deal with opinions, not facts"
Its you whom did not get it, dear pot
And whatever you say now, is just last minute research work into the internet to know who he is. So pls don't make your last minute research work sound like a big deal
a) Protectionism is good for Singapore and it promotes investment like IRs
b) Open economy is bad for Singapore and its people
c) 80/20 rule in income distribution theory
d) If your national carrier doest threat you well, you should consider leaving the country.
f) Singapore IRs is an example of protectionism
g) Local and foreign companies offer the same benefits to Singapore economy
h) All casino operators can operate world class IR by themselves
i) Singapore employer prefers more expensive Indian FT to cheaper average local graduate.
j) it is wrong for government to outsource project to overseas companies even if it is better value for money.
k) S-league foreign footballers are all highly educated individual from overseas
l) You need paper qualification to be a talent.
m) Income gap = living standard
n) Singapore government is pro rich people, not pro business -
Originally posted by Gazelle:
The property boom that we are seeing now are mainly concentrated in the prime district. As far as I know the prices of "subsidize" HDB flat from government, has not been affected yet. As long as the government keep a watch on this, I dont see why young couple wont be able to afford it, unless you are expecting them to splash out 150K on renovation.
i don't agree, if you're talking about HDBs near prime areas, prices have gone up quite a fair bit. Referring to an article by Jocelyn Lee (Straits Times, 6 May 2007), Bukit Merah flats are selling at $100,000 above valuation. A four room HDB in that area will cost almost $0.5 million. For people who wish to stay near their parents, this price increase is significant and real.
The HDB price index is set to increase by about 5% this year which translates to a $15,000 hike for a $300,000 resale flat. Not many young couples would see their combined salaries increase by $15,000 this year and they would probably have to carry this extra burden over the next three years, provided HDB prices do not continue to incease by $15,000 for the next three years.
I think it is abit early to say that the soaring housing price will continue like what we see in the 80s and 90s. I believe once the en bloc fever subside the property price will stabilize. As far as wages is concerned it really depends on which sector of the industry, some sectors are definitely moving faster than others, but as long as our economy continue to focus on services be less reliant on manufacturing, globalisation will have lesser effect on us.
with the current salary stagnation, it only takes a fraction of the price hike in the 80s and 90s to seriously impact the living standards of ordinary singaporeans. the finance sector only accounts for 25% of our GDP, so three quarters of us do not enjoy the kind of pay increase that allows us to keep up with HDB price increases. services too can be affected by globalisation, especially when our government is so ever eager to import foreign talent.
As far as I know, the diesel for cab drivers are "subsidize", ie. cheaper than pump price, and they pay rental fee to the taxi companies, not necessary GLCs. What do you mean when you say bulk of their earning goes to the government?
diesel subsidy is insignificant, the bulk of hike in diesel price falls squarely on cab drivers and passed on to consumers in the form of increased cab fares. the shareholders of taxi companies are predominantly GLCs. since the shareholder owners are ultimately GLCs, then the bulk of earnings goes to the government.
The service industry might not look like an attractive job for the educated and able, but it is a good source of income for students, uneducated and unskilled workers and unemployed.
the benefits of this income doesn't come free. it comes with real disturbances to property prices which is a major cost component of living in Singapore. furthermore, these aren't exactly the higher value added jobs that you mention below.
The days of having huge manufacturing factories that employ thousands are over, and we are unlikely to see that again. Singapore economy has to move toward higher value added manufacturing which usually are less labour intensive, and service industry.
bringing rich men here to wine and dine will not induce the so-called higher value added industries. being a waiter at Le Amis restaurant isn't that much value added is it?
Condo might be built by foreign workers, but there are also alot of local elements involves. E.g the people who design it, the people and companies who maintain it, the property agent the sells it etc.
the people who maintain it are often banghras as well. in any case, the construction industry is only 5% of our economy so the interests of this sector has to be balanced against the interests of the 80% singaporeans who stay in HDBs.
Even for Ferrari, you also need SE to broker the sales, and the mechanic to maintain them (actually they do need alot of maintainces)
the major cost component of a Ferrari is the Ferrari itself which the cost of maintenance pales in comparison to. the import tax that the government imposes is a lot more significant instead. so if there is ever a winner, it would be, as always, the government.
Are you saying that an increase of dinners at Le Amis restaurant will cause a price increase of a bowl of Mee Pok in AMK? And an increase of Bentley cars in Singapore result in an increase in public transport?
are you saying that as the number of restaurants in the like of Le Amis increases here, it will not in any way eat into the available land space for food courts and other smaller restaurants? are you saying an increase in Bentley cars will not tend to lift up the price of COEs?
The biggest culprit for the rise in commerical rental price will be the REITs, not so much of the rich people buying residential property. Singapore has a wide variety of shopping malls, and I am sure some will be more expensive than others.
think about it. why should REITs suddenly snap up commercial units? it is the same reason for our current housing property boom. REIT companies expect rich people to come due to vigorous invitation by the government and so are snapping up shopping malls, renovating them to make them more upmarket which translates to pricier goods for everyone. There may be a wide variety of shopping malls but with more catering to the needs of the rich, there would be an upward pressure on shopping mall rentals which we end up paying for.
If you are talking about the rich competing with Singaporeans for luxury goods, I would agree with you. However if you are talking about basic things like food stuffs and public transport etc. I dont think so.
let me explain again. if a lot of rich men are coming, businessmen being businessmen would convert more shopping mall usage to posh, expensive restaurants while cheaper outlets would be evicted. cheaper outlets, if they were to justify their continued operation would be forced to up their prices which we ordinary folks end up paying for.
if a lot of rich men come here and take up all the available COEs for their Ferraris, it would jack up COEs for Nissans and Toyotas and the cost of car ownership to Singaporeans.
Yes, but private residential area will never be developed as HDB and vice versa. So I dont see how one could affect the other unless singapore has exhausted every inch of land in Singapore. I think we should be more concern if we have too many middle class FT buying up HDB flat in Singapore.
just like we used to say that Singapore will never have casinos. once we acknowledge the fact that on a per plot of land basis, the price singaporeans pay for their HDBs is twice that a foreigner pays for his prime district bungalow, we should also acknowledge that it is fundamentally wrong and we should not continue to subsidise rich foreigners. -
Originally posted by Gazelle:
oh dear pot, now its about Peter Drucker management talk is all bull crap *gasp*
Now I am telling you your opinions highlighted below are full of crap. Thats my opinion about your opinions. If you are capable of standing by your opinion, I am sure you should be capable of defending them with facts and not trying to bring out some management bull crap to talk about opinion.
you have reached the worst levels of degradation. You even insulted a dead man's work. I feel so sad for you...
Again, stop repeating your rubbish. Those are your conclusions, not mine. And you still haven't learnt yet, that you do not deal with facts. You deal with opinions -
[quote]Originally posted by snow leopard:
i don't agree, if you're talking about HDBs near prime areas, prices have gone up quite a fair bit. Referring to an article by Jocelyn Lee (Straits Times, 6 May 2007), Bukit Merah flats are selling at $100,000 above valuation. A four room HDB in that area will cost almost $0.5 million. For people who wish to stay near their parents, this price increase is significant and real. [/color]
The HDB price index is set to increase by about 5% this year which translates to a $15,000 hike for a $300,000 resale flat. Not many young couples would see their combined salaries increase by $15,000 this year and they would probably have to carry this extra burden over the next 5 years, provided HDB prices do not continue to incease by $15,000 for the next five years.
In the first place, I wasnt talking about HDB flat in prime area, I was talking about subsidized HDB flats that you purchase directly from the government, not from the resale market.
What you are highlighting are prices of HDB flat in prime and matured estate and honestly a 5% surge in price is really nothing to be alarm if you consider the amount of money you have paid for the flat a few years ago and the interest your are paying for your mortgage.
You cant expect that a couple to pay off the entire 300K mortgage within a year would you? Hence it is not right to say if the couple salary has gone up by 15K. If 15K would to spread over 25 to 30 years, I dont think that is really a big amount. Furthermore suppose if the couple have bought a flat at 300K today and property prices continue to rise, they would have also "pocketed" $15K in 1 year isnt it?
with the current salary stagnation, it only takes a fraction of the price hike in the 80s and 90s to seriously impact the living standards of ordinary singaporeans. the finance sector only accounts for 25% of our GDP, so three quarters of us do not enjoy the kind of pay increase that allows us to keep up with HDB price increases. services too can be affected by globalisation, especially when our government is so ever eager to import foreign talent.
Do you have any data to support your claim that salary in singapore are stagnated and 75% of the work forces are not getting any pay increase. Because from what I read recently, there were report stating that starting pay of NTU grad and civil servants has already gone up by more than 10% i think.
FT is something which is within our government's control, hence I wont see that as a gain not threat to this country. No government is eager to import foreign talents if their own population is capable of fulfilling jobs that is available in the country.
There was a small article in Sunday time stating that it is not how much you earn that make you rich, it is who much you save. Hence it is not true that you need to be a banker and living in Dist 9 and 10 to be rich. Many of these people are probably paying the housing loan throught their nose
diesel at most cost $10 per night but rental is easily $90 which is the real killer. the shareholders of taxi companies are predominantly GLCs. since the shareholder owners are ultimately GLCs, then the bulk of earnings goes to the government.
Is the $90 rental per 24 hours or per night? Most taxi companies belong to listed companues, but there are also private companies, such as SMART and Preimer. Since Comfortdelgro is a listed company, I am not sure if it is right to say that bulk of the company's earnings goes to government
the benefits of this income doesn't come free. it comes with real disturbances to property prices which is a major cost component of living in Singapore. furthermore, these aren't exactly the higher value added jobs that you mention below.
Do you have reason to believe the the property prices in Singapore will continue to surge forever without slowing down, and booming property prices are the source of income for the service industry? And is there any scientific studies that show a growing servicing industry will contribute to a surge in property price, and vice versa.
Referring back to what I have mentioned, I was stating higher value added manufacturing, not service.
""The days of having huge manufacturing factories that employ thousands are over, and we are unlikely to see that again. Singapore economy has to move toward higher value added manufacturing which usually are less labour intensive, and service industry""
bringing rich men here to wine and dine will not induce the so-called higher value added industries. being a waiter at Le Amis restaurant isn't that much value added is it?
See my post above. And one thing for sure, you dont need a degree to be a waiter or waitress at Le Amis, and the service industry will create alot of opportunity for people who have less paper qualification.
the people who maintain it are often banghras as well. in any case, the construction industry is only 5% of our economy so the interests of this sector has to be balanced against the interests of the 80% singaporeans who stay in HDBs.
I am not sure which estate or apartment you are staying, as far as I am aware, most of the security and maintainece personnel, include those in the office, at my apartment are local indians, chinese and malays, not bangladeshi.
Singapore is an open market, if there is a demand for condo, there will be developers who will be willing to sell. Hence I dont see a logic about sacrificing the construction industry for the sake of 80% Singaporeeans who stay in HDB. And who is suppose to build the HDB flats if we dont have foreign workers? Is Singaporeans willing to pay Singaporeans to build flats?
the major cost component of a Ferrari is the Ferrari itself which the cost of maintenance pales in comparison to. the import tax that the government imposes is a lot more significant instead. so if there is ever a winner, it would be, as always, the government.
Our discussion is not about who being the "winner", it is about what a rich man buying a Ferrari in Singapore will contribute to our economy, does it create jobs for the people in Singapore. -
Continue :
[quote]Originally posted by snow leopard:
are you saying that as the number of restaurants in the like of Le Amis increases here, it will not in any way eat into the available land space for food courts and other smaller restaurants? are you saying an increase in Bentley cars will not tend to lift up the price of COEs?
Like I mentioned before if you are saying that the influx of rich foreigners will compete with Singaporeans on luxury goods and prime estate, I would agree with you. However I dont see how Le Amis could be competing with Kopitiam for coffeeshop space in HDB estate or outskirt shopping mall. Have you forgotten what you mentioned about 80% of Singaporeans living in HDB?
There are different Cat. of COE for different size of car and I am sure the top and bottom end buyer usually dont mix when they are bidding for COE, plus how many Ferraris and Bentley can the rich buy every month considering that the prices of cars are the most expensive in this world. I think the bulk of the owner of such luxury cars are not foreigners but Singaporeans
think about it. why should REITs suddenly snap up commercial units? it is the same reason for our current housing property boom. REIT companies expect rich people to come due to vigorous invitation by the government and so are snapping up shopping malls, renovating them to make them more upmarket which translates to pricier goods for everyone. There may be a wide variety of shopping malls but with more catering to the needs of the rich, there would be an upward pressure on shopping mall rentals which we end up paying for.
There are many different kind of REITs in singapore, some are focusing on shopping malls, like Suntec, while others are mostly focusing of factories and warehouses. Hence I dont think it is right to make the comments about REIT companies are driven by rich people coming to Singapore.
As you have mentioned that 80% of Singaporeans are living in HDB flats, hence do you think that shopping malls in Singapore can survive by catering only to the rich?
let me explain again. if a lot of rich men are coming, businessmen being businessmen would convert more shopping mall usage to posh, expensive restaurants while cheaper outlets would be evicted. cheaper outlets, if they were to justify their continued operation would be forced to up their prices which we ordinary folks end up paying for.
if a lot of rich men come here and take up all the available COEs for their Ferraris, it would jack up COEs for Nissans and Toyotas and the cost of car ownership to Singaporeans.
the big word is "IF". Suppose IF in the next 10 to 15 years, 50% of the population in Singapore are millionaires then you are right.
just like we used to say that Singapore will never have casinos. once we acknowledge the fact that on a per plot of land basis, the price singaporeans pay for their HDBs is twice that a foreigner pays for his prime district bungalow, we should also acknowledge that it is fundamentally wrong and we should not continue to subsidise rich foreigners.
If you want to look at it this way, then I would say the most expensive plot of land in Singapore is not HDB, they are the high rise apartment in dist 9 and 10 and for some 99 year leasehold project they are selling at around S$1500 to S$2000 psf, and their penthouse could hit $3000 per psf, plus they usually have a higher plot ratio than HDB. -
Again, I wish to highlight to you at least the experience which I have in the IT sector. The govt outsources their projects to outsourced companies, whom in turn mostly are indian companies.Originally posted by Gazelle:FT is something which is within our government's control, hence I wont see that as a threat to this country. No government is eager to import foreign talents if their own population is capable of fulfilling the job vacancies in this country.
There was a small article in Sunday time stating that it is not how much you earn that make you rich, it is who much you save. Hence it is not true that you need to be a banker and living in Dist 9 and 10 to be rich.
These indian companies do not hire local people, but always go back to India to import 'talents'. When the govt agency asked why they do not use locals, the indians reply that its coz the locals cannot do their job. Being the IT idiot, the agency listens to the indian company.
I have stated this repeatedly to you, you don't want to listen. A colleague of mine once got so fed up, she wrote a letter to MOM indicating the actual situation on the ground. I understand that a certain ministry now dictates that the project team should at least be 50% Singaporean.
The govt is NOT eager to import foreign talents. The govt just doesn't really care who does the job, and does not truly walk the grounds to understand.
As to your small article, I would like to inform you that there are different views to this. Saving money is not enough to make you rich. It is those who MAKE money that become rich.
I personally believe in that. How much can you save on a 4.5k job? -
Originally posted by Gazelle:
In the first place, I wasnt talking about HDB flat in prime area, I was talking about subsidized HDB flats that you purchase directly from the government, not from the resale market.
i see, so your analysis is incomplete and missing an important ingredient. HDB applications in mature estates can be easily five times over subscribed so much so that most people end up buying from the secondary market instead. As such, the HDB resale market is an important source of housing supply which means that price disturbances spilling over to the HDB resale market is a real and significant problem.
What you are highlighting are prices of HDB flat in prime and matured estate and honestly a 5% surge in price is really nothing to be alarm if you consider the amount of money you have paid for the flat a few years ago and the interest your are paying for your mortgage.
when we say that HDB price hikes are confined to mature estates and not to newer estates like Jurong West or Choa Chu Kang, what are we actually saying? all we are saying is that given a choice, nobody wants to live in Jurong West or Choa Chu Kang.
5% may look insignificant but it is actually $15,000 each year. if you do not consider this alarming, perhaps you can give me $15,000.
You cant expect that a couple to pay off the entire 300K mortgage within a year would you? Hence it is not right to say if the couple salary has gone up by 15K. If 15K would to spread over 25 to 30 years, I dont think that is really a big amount. Furthermore suppose if the couple have bought a flat at 300K today and property prices continue to rise, they would have also "pocketed" $15K in 1 year isnt it?
your argument doesn't hold water. we are not concerned with the original price of $300K because like it or not, it is the price you must pay to begin with, property boom or no property boom. the additional $15K on the other hand, is an extra burden whether you pay it with one bank cheque or spread it over 25 years. in fact, you might even end up paying $30K extra in total including interests if you spread it over 25 years.
the $15K "pocketing" is only on paper and can only be realised if we sell our property. but where are we to stay if we were to sell our property? should we change house every five years just to coincide with the ups and downs of the property market?
Do you have any data to support your claim that salary in singapore are stagnated and 75% of the work forces are not getting any pay increase.
please quote me correctly, i did not say "75% of the work forces are not getting any pay increase". i said "three quarters of us do not enjoy the kind of pay increase that allows us to keep up with HDB price increases."
here are some proof to my claim:
"Although we have seen very strong growth, we're experiencing this new phenomenon of median real-wage stagnation and low-income decline," says Yeoh Lam Keong, vice president of the Economic Society of Singapore [source: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16725528/site/newsweek/]
"SINGAPORE: Middle class wages have been stagnant in the past 5 years, according to economists, and this could lead to social instability." [source: http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/singaporelocalnews/print/251939/1/.html]
but the best proof of all is a speech by Minister of State for Trade and Industry, Mr Lee Yi Shyan who presented the following facts:
"While Singapore residents in the managerial, professional and technical occupation enjoyed nominal wage growth of 4.7% per annum between 1990 and 2005, the middle level experienced lower income growth of 3.7%. In particular, the monthly income of the lowest paid group declined between 2000 and 2005." [source: http://www.pap.org.sg/articleview.php?id=1314&mode=&cid=23]
According to Mr Lee, salaries of high income and middle income earners increased by less than 5% and 4% respectively while low incomers actually earned less. so none of us, on average, earned more than the current 5% increase in HDB price so i'm right to say that three quarters of us do not enjoy the kind of pay increase that allows us to keep up with HDB price increases.
Because from what I read recently, there were report stating that starting pay of NTU grad and civil servants has already gone up by more than 10% i think.
if you think deeper into what you read in the papers, you'd realise that NTU grads comprise a significant numbers of accountants so their pay jump is merely a reflection of the current boom in the finance sector. also, hike in civil sevice pay is in line with PM Lee's determination to attract good people into the civil service. beyond these obvious reasons, there is no real wage increase for most of us.
FT is something which is within our government's control, hence I wont see that as a gain not threat to this country. No government is eager to import foreign talents if their own population is capable of fulfilling jobs that is available in the country.
i disagree. our government is different, it is always different, it is the only government in existence that pays itself million dollar salaries. there is a tendency for our government to discount its own people and to over glorify the talents of foreigners. it is no secret that the government is going all out to woo foreign talents to beef up its population to 6.5 million. just recently, university students from truly first world nations have been given the green light to come here for six months to do anything they like, regardless of whether or not they displace fellow singaporeans. a "New Immigrants Special" was splashed all over Sunday Times lifestyle recently espousing the virtues of "mixed" babies ...
There was a small article in Sunday time stating that it is not how much you earn that make you rich, it is who much you save. Hence it is not true that you need to be a banker and living in Dist 9 and 10 to be rich. Many of these people are probably paying the housing loan throught their nose
rich or poor, thrify or otherwise, property price hike is a real issue that can severely impact the lives of ordinary singaporeans.
Is the $90 rental per 24 hours or per night? Most taxi companies belong to listed companues, but there are also private companies, such as SMART and Preimer. Since Comfortdelgro is a listed company, I am not sure if it is right to say that bulk of the company's earnings goes to government
most of the money is made either in the wee morning hours or in the evenings so the rest of the 24 hours is essentially unproductive. so even if you have two shifts, your window of opportunity for making money is only three, four hours during which you need to cover $45 rental and perhaps $15 diesel. hardly promising.
if you look at the majority shareholders, they inevitably link back to Temasek so it is right to say that the bulk of earnings goes to the government.
Do you have reason to believe the the property prices in Singapore will continue to surge forever without slowing down, and booming property prices are the source of income for the service industry?
going by past experience, it is not likely to subside without persisting for at least a few years and anyone who needs to start a family during this period of surge would end up paying significantly more for nothing. booming property prices is a boon to the construction and property sectors, but only while it lasts.
And is there any scientific studies that show a growing servicing industry will contribute to a surge in property price, and vice versa.
i think the fundamental determining factor of property prices are demand and supply for housing. demand is a function of economy, wages and population growth which are either market driven or follows a natural discourse. the only artificial factor is immigration and we have some of the highest immigration rates in the world that puts an unhealthy strain on local property prices. -
Originally posted by Gazelle:
Referring back to what I have mentioned, I was stating higher value added manufacturing, not service.
i changed it to "service" to make your argument sound more convincing. higher value added manufacturing is still manufacturing. it is highly dependent on capital and technology which is easily moved from one country to another. service on the other hand depends on skills, knowledge, language and such intangibles as atttitudes which may not be as easily acquired or mastered.
See my post above. And one thing for sure, you dont need a degree to be a waiter or waitress at Le Amis, and the service industry will create alot of opportunity for people who have less paper qualification.
i quote your words from below "plus how many Ferraris and Bentley can the rich buy every month ..." in the same token, how many meals can the rich eat per day. how many waiters does he require to serve him? in order to create a lot of waitering opportunities, you would need a lot of rich people who would in turn overwhelm the resources / infrastructures that are currently available.
I am not sure which estate or apartment you are staying, as far as I am aware, most of the security and maintainece personnel, include those in the office, at my apartment are local indians, chinese and malays, not bangladeshi.
still, how many people can you employ to maintain an estate of say five condominiums? how many rich foreigners do you need to fill those condominiums? the ratio between the number of people you can employ against the number of rich foreign talent you have to import is so lob sided.
Singapore is an open market, if there is a demand for condo, there will be developers who will be willing to sell.
the demand is artificially induced through vigorous import of foreign talents. that's where it is not so market oriented but government induced instead.
Hence I dont see a logic about sacrificing the construction industry for the sake of 80% Singaporeeans who stay in HDB. And who is suppose to build the HDB flats if we dont have foreign workers? Is Singaporeans willing to pay Singaporeans to build flats?
no one's saying that the construction industry should be sacrificed. all i'm saying is that we should not be over zealous with foreign talent import and the rate of any such importation should be at a level that can be comfortably absorbed by the economy without creating price distortions or even bubbles.
Our discussion is not about who being the "winner", it is about what a rich man buying a Ferrari in Singapore will contribute to our economy, does it create jobs for the people in Singapore.
your opinion is essentially one sided. it only considers the contribution to the economy and job creation without considering how much that contribution would be, how much job creation and at what cost. you refuse to see such signs as our current property boom (hopefully not bubble) as a signal that we're perhaps taking on more than we can comfortably chew.
as for who wins, that is also an essential ingredient in the discussion because if you look at the entire picture, the one that stands to benefit the most would undoubtedly be the govt.
Like I mentioned before if you are saying that the influx of rich foreigners will compete with Singaporeans on luxury goods and prime estate, I would agree with you. However I dont see how Le Amis could be competing with Kopitiam for coffeeshop space in HDB estate or outskirt shopping mall. Have you forgotten what you mentioned about 80% of Singaporeans living in HDB?
The shopping centre where Le Amis resides in would undoubtedly have other restaurants that may or may not be as upmarket, such as MOS Burger perhaps. to quote your words earlier "[to] create alot of opportunity for people who have less paper qualification.", you would in turn need a lot of rich people which would in turn pressure more shopping mall usage to be converted into posh, expensive restaurants while cheaper outlets gets phased out. cheaper outlets, if they were to justify their continued operation would be forced to up their prices which we ordinary folks end up paying for.
There are different Cat. of COE for different size of car and I am sure the top and bottom end buyer usually dont mix when they are bidding for COE,
firstly they do mix, especially in the open category. secondly, MPVs are popular amongst heartlanders and these usually come in large sizes so they do compete with Ferraris for the same COEs. thirdly, if the higher CC category is over subscribed and experiences a sharp price increase, it naturally induces buyers to downgrade to the lower CC category. so even though there are two distinct categories, their prices are often correlated and move in tandem. a quick look at COE prices would tell you that.
plus how many Ferraris and Bentley can the rich buy every month considering that the prices of cars are the most expensive in this world. I think the bulk of the owner of such luxury cars are not foreigners but Singaporeans
well, if as you said we need to "create alot of opportunity for people who have less paper qualification.", we would then need a lot of rich people which would collectively purchase enough Ferraris to, even if not on a monthly basis, influence COE prices.
There are many different kind of REITs in singapore, some are focusing on shopping malls, like Suntec, while others are mostly focusing of factories and warehouses. Hence I dont think it is right to make the comments about REIT companies are driven by rich people coming to Singapore.
it is not a matter of right or wrong but common sense that tells you that the driving force for REITs to snap up such properties as shopping malls and office spaces is the expectation of an influx of rich people.
As you have mentioned that 80% of Singaporeans are living in HDB flats, hence do you think that shopping malls in Singapore can survive by catering only to the rich?
i didn't say they would only cater to the rich. i said, time and again, that in catering to the needs of the rich, resources would be channelled towards them with the consequence that whatever remaining resources for the 80% singaporeans would come at a higher price.
the big word is "IF". Suppose IF in the next 10 to 15 years, 50% of the population in Singapore are millionaires then you are right.
you don't need 50% of the population to be millionaires to impact the price of COEs. a simple example to help you see. suppose number of buyers is twice number of COE quotas. price would be determined by the median bid. if one extra millionaire comes along, it would knock the median bidder out of bid so that the price is now determined by the bid that is immediately higher than the original median bid. if 10 millionaires comes along, COE would be jacked up 10 rungs higher than the original price.
If you want to look at it this way, then I would say the most expensive plot of land in Singapore is not HDB, they are the high rise apartment in dist 9 and 10 and for some 99 year leasehold project they are selling at around S$1500 to S$2000 psf, and their penthouse could hit $3000 per psf, plus they usually have a higher plot ratio than HDB.
just the same, whether you cite high rise apartments or HDBs, on a per plot land basis, bungalow owners pay far less than what the piece of land is collectively worth to an entire block of condominium / HDB residents. so the issue persists, why are we subsidising bungalow owners? -
Originally posted by snow leopard:
i see, so your analysis is incomplete and missing an important ingredient. HDB applications in mature estates can be easily five times over subscribed so much so that most people end up buying from the secondary market instead. As such, the HDB resale market is an important source of housing supply which means that price disturbances spilling over to the HDB resale market is a real and significant problem.
Is our discussion still focusing on existing or new homeowners? If it is the latter, all I can say is that it is a luxury to be living in centralized HDB estate especially for young couples that has just started out to work. And please also take into consideration the 30 to 40K grant government is giving for 1st time HDB flat buyers.
when we say that HDB price hikes are confined to mature estates and not to newer estates like Jurong West or Choa Chu Kang, what are we actually saying? all we are saying is that given a choice, nobody wants to live in Jurong West or Choa Chu Kang.
5% may look insignificant but it is actually $15,000 each year. if you do not consider this alarming, perhaps you can give me $15,000.
Where you live really depends on where you work, where you grew up and the kind of lifestyle you want.. E.g Some people like East Coast, Joo Chiat areas, but some find it too crowded an noisy. Some people prefer to spend less time traveling, hence would prefer to live closer to work place. Given a choice, I am sure most people would like to live in Nassim Hill bungalow isnÂ’t it? but the only problem is you cant afford it.
Price hike in not confined to matured estates, they are confine mostly to freehold prime properties and estate near the IRs.
What makes you so sure that HDB prices in Singapore will continue to grow by 5% every year? Suppose if you are buying a 99 leasehold property, do you want to see your proper depreciate over time, or do you prefer to at least maintain the value over time?
your argument doesn't hold water. we are not concerned with the original price of $300K because like it or not, it is the price you must pay to begin with, property boom or no property boom. the additional $15K on the other hand, is an extra burden whether you pay it with one bank cheque or spread it over 25 years. in fact, you might even end up paying $30K extra in total including interests if you spread it over 25 years.
the $15K "pocketing" is only on paper and can only be realised if we sell our property. but where are we to stay if we were to sell our property? should we change house every five years just to coincide with the ups and downs of the property market?
What do you mean that you are not concern about the original price? 5% of 400K and 5% of 200K is a difference of $10K per year? And if you are taking home loan of 400K vs 200K you will be paying twice the amount for mortgage and interests. As long as you are living in the leasehold property, you can only benefit if your property appreciate faster than the depreciation rate.
I have already included a quotation mark “” above pocketed and I know it’s a paper gain, but paper gain on property is part of your asset in your balance sheet and it is not something that is as volatile as stock market that will be wipe off overnight. Suppose when you are about 55 to 60 years old, and you decided to move in to live with your children, the property that you holding will be a decent retirement fund.
As a matter of fact, there are people in Singapore that shift every 5 years, sometime they downgrade to cash in on the gain and sometime the upgrade to pamper themselves. -
Originally posted by snow leopard:
please quote me correctly, i did not say "75% of the work forces are not getting any pay increase". i said "three quarters of us do not enjoy the kind of pay increase that allows us to keep up with HDB price increases."
According to Mr Lee, salaries of high income and middle income earners increased by less than 5% and 4% respectively while low incomers actually earned less. so none of us, on average, earned more than the current 5% increase in HDB price so i'm right to say
Can you show us the price fluctuation of HDB flats for the past 10 years and compare it with the salary trend or Singapore or young couple for the same period.? DonÂ’t you think that is a foolish to use 1 yearÂ’s of grow rate of 5% to extrapolate into the future?
Do you think it is fair for an economist to use statistic from 2001 to 2006 to compare with the currently economic situation? Can you remember when was Singapore biggest recession since independent?
if you think deeper into what you read in the papers, you'd realise that NTU grads comprise a significant numbers of accountants so their pay jump is merely a reflection of the current boom in the finance sector. also, hike in civil sevice pay is in line with PM Lee's determination to attract good people into the civil service. beyond these obvious reasons, there is no real wage increase for most of us.
Please support your argument that majority of the NTU grad from 2006 are accountants? And is a boom in financial sector a zero sum game for our economy? Or is because you dont get to enjoy it, you dont think it is important?
Mind if I ask you are working in which industry?
i disagree. our government is different, it is always different, it is the only government in existence that pays itself million dollar salaries. there is a tendency for our government to discount its own people and to over glorify the talents of foreigners. it is no secret that the government is going all out to woo foreign talents to beef up its population to 6.5 million. just recently, university students from truly first world nations have been given the green light to come here for six months to do anything they like, regardless of whether or not they displace fellow singaporeans. a "New Immigrants Special" was splashed all over Sunday Times lifestyle recently espousing the virtues of "mixed" babies ...
Please keep the government pay discussion outside this threat because that is a different subject all together and it has already been discussed to many times over. What I am saying is that FT population in Singapore is something that is within our governmentÂ’s control. Yes or No?
Singapore is only a 40 plus year old multi cultural country, all it takes is one generation to turn these “New Immigrant” to be the same Singaporeans as you and me. So dont think that being a singaporeans is going to make you such a big deal in this country, especially i you are incapable for contributing to this country.
Could you give us an example of government discounting Singaporeans, and glorifying foreigners.
rich or poor, thrify or otherwise, property price hike is a real issue that can severely impact the lives of ordinary singaporeans.
Do you expect to see a continual 5% surge in HDB price for the next 5 to 10 years?
most of the money is made either in the wee morning hours or in the evenings so the rest of the 24 hours is essentially unproductive. so even if you have two shifts, your window of opportunity for making money is only three, four hours during which you need to cover $45 rental and perhaps $15 diesel. hardly promising.
if you look at the majority shareholders, they inevitably link back to Temasek so it is right to say that the bulk of earnings goes to the government.
Do you think an influx of rich people and booming tourism industry will benefits the taxi drivers? Do you know how many % of Comfortdelgro is own by Temasek? And who owns Temasek?
going by past experience, it is not likely to subside without persisting for at least a few years and anyone who needs to start a family during this period of surge would end up paying significantly more for nothing. booming property prices is a boon to the construction and property sectors, but only while it lasts.
Are you referring to HDB price island wide or just prime area HDB? What past experience are you referring to? Is the current surge in property price driven by the same factor in the past?
i think the fundamental determining factor of property prices are demand and supply for housing. demand is a function of economy, wages and population growth which are either market driven or follows a natural discourse. the only artificial factor is immigration and we have some of the highest immigration rates in the world that puts an unhealthy strain on local property prices.
You are not answering my question; you are simply diverting your attention on FT again. My question is, does a boom in the service industry contribute to a surge in property price and vice versa. Before you point your fingers at those immigrants for causing the strain on property price, you might want to take a look at Singaporeans kiasu attitude in buying property first. Have you forgotten how Singaporeans queue over night for new property launches in the 90s? -
Originally posted by snow leopard:
i changed it to "service" to make your argument sound more convincing. higher value added manufacturing is still manufacturing. it is highly dependent on capital and technology which is easily moved from one country to another. service on the other hand depends on skills, knowledge, language and such intangibles as attitudes which may not be as easily acquired or mastered.
ThatÂ’s where you are wrong, high tech companies tend to prefer their manufacturing and R&D operation to be located in a country where it has the right infrastructure, the supporting industries and government support for IP protection and tax incentives. High tech manufacturing is different from mass production manufacturing that employs thousands of workers. High tech manufacturing requires higher level of skills and know-how and they are cannot be replace by cheaper unskilled work force.
In the service industry, there is a front office that deals directly with customers and they is also the back office. Hence it is not right to assume the you need all these attributes to be working in the service industry.
i quote your words from below "plus how many Ferraris and Bentley can the rich buy every month ..." in the same token, how many meals can the rich eat per day. how many waiters does he require to serve him? in order to create a lot of waitering opportunities, you would need a lot of rich people who would in turn overwhelm the resources / infrastructures that are currently available.
a) You donÂ’t buy a car everyday, but you have to eat 3 to 4 times a day, 365 days per year. Hence what does Ferrari has to do with eating? Plus besides eating there are still tons of things that require service too.
b) I was saying that service industry will create job opportunity to those unskills and less educated. I did not say that service industry catering ONLY for the rich would create enough job opportunity to those less skills and less educated.
still, how many people can you employ to maintain an estate of say five condominiums? how many rich foreigners do you need to fill those condominiums? the ratio between the number of people you can employ against the number of rich foreign talent you have to import is so lob sided.
I would say at least 50 permanent staffs to maintain a good size apartment that comes with full facilities, and also contractors that provide pool cleaning, gym maintenance, gardening, etc.
How many households that need to fill those condominium is not really an issue or concern because as long as the apartment has got its TOP, irregardless of the occupancy rate, everything will have to be maintained.
the demand is artificially induced through vigorous import of foreign talents. that's where it is not so market oriented but government induced instead.
FTs are attracted to Singapore not imported and you donÂ’t need to be living in Singapore to buy property in Singapore, just like Singaporeans buying property in Australia, Malaysia etc. Hence if this is not a case of supply and demand, what is?
no one's saying that the construction industry should be sacrificed. all i'm saying is that we should not be over zealous with foreign talent import and the rate of any such importation should be at a level that can be comfortably absorbed by the economy without creating price distortions or even bubbles.
a) You are against FT, but you want them to build your house. Who do you tink you are? King?
b) Singapore government does not import FT, it is the companies that invested in Singapore that attracts them to our shore.
c) Is a boom in construction industry good for Singapore? Yes or No?
your opinion is essentially one sided. it only considers the contribution to the economy and job creation without considering how much that contribution would be, how much job creation and at what cost. you refuse to see such signs as our current property boom (hopefully not bubble) as a signal that we're perhaps taking on more than we can comfortably chew.
as for who wins, that is also an essential ingredient in the discussion because if you look at the entire picture, the one that stands to benefit the most would undoubtedly be the govt.
Your opinion is essentially focusing on yourself wanting to buy prime property, but unwilling to pay a premium. And you argument has never been about the people who have been struggling to find a stable job in Singapore, and instead you are always blaming the rich FT that is pushing up the price of your dream home and dream car.
Inflation is something that is going to hit Singapore just like it is going to hit other countries regardless if there is a IR or not. The main culprit? Oil companies, mining companies, shipping companies etc. -
Originally posted by snow leopard:
The shopping centre where Le Amis resides in would undoubtedly have other restaurants that may or may not be as upmarket, such as MOS Burger perhaps. to quote your words earlier "[to] create alot of opportunity for people who have less paper qualification.", you would in turn need a lot of rich people which would in turn pressure more shopping mall usage to be converted into posh, expensive restaurants while cheaper outlets gets phased out. cheaper outlets, if they were to justify their continued operation would be forced to up their prices which we ordinary folks end up paying for.
a) Expensive restaurant is unlikely to be located in shopping malls because there is a lack of privacy and exclusivity. Hence what you have been speculating are baseless assumptions.
b) In any restaurant regardless highend or lowend you would requires service staffs such as chef, dish washer, waiters and waitresses, kitchen staffs, PR manager, cashier etc. So why are you making the assumption that only highend restaurant can contribute to that?
firstly they do mix, especially in the open category. secondly, MPVs are popular amongst heartlanders and these usually come in large sizes so they do compete with Ferraris for the same COEs. thirdly, if the higher CC category is over subscribed and experiences a sharp price increase, it naturally induces buyers to downgrade to the lower CC category. so even though there are two distinct categories, their prices are often correlated and move in tandem. a quick look at COE prices would tell you that.
Oh, I didnÂ’t know that people who are complaining stagnant in salary are also bidding for high CC category, and buying big petrol guzzling MPV. I thought those are luxury items rather than necessity?
well, if as you said we need to "create alot of opportunity for people who have less paper qualification.", we would then need a lot of rich people which would collectively purchase enough Ferraris to, even if not on a monthly basis, influence COE prices.
Your argument is that rich man buying Ferraris and Bentley is going to push up the price for COE, not if buying Ferrari will create enough job for the people with less qualification.
Would appreciate if you donÂ’t lump everything today just because you are unable to defend your point.
It is not a matter of right or wrong but common sense that tells you that the driving force for REITs to snap up such properties as shopping malls and office spaces is the expectation of an influx of rich people.
Common sense tells me that if REIT are driven by influx of rich people into Singapore, these REITs should be buying up prime shopping mall along orchard road. Could you tell us how many of those prime shopping mall actually own by REITs.
REITs are not something that is confined to only Singapore, hence could you explain why they are also REITs in country where they donÂ’t have such influx of rich people?
i didn't say they would only cater to the rich. i said, time and again, that in catering to the needs of the rich, resources would be channelled towards them with the consequence that whatever remaining resources for the 80% singaporeans would come at a higher price.
You are making a fundamentally wrong assumption that there will be no new shopping malls (in this case resources) and they will be a major shortage of retail space in Singapore.
Do you know how many new shopping malls is coming up around Singapore?
you don't need 50% of the population to be millionaires to impact the price of COEs. a simple example to help you see. suppose number of buyers is twice number of COE quotas. price would be determined by the median bid. if one extra millionaire comes along, it would knock the median bidder out of bid so that the price is now determined by the bid that is immediately higher than the original median bid. if 10 millionaires comes along, COE would be jacked up 10 rungs higher than the original price.
That segment of population whom are bidding for such COE are people who have benefit from the economic boom, so I donÂ’t see why the government should be concern. The possible reason why this is bordering you is because you are worried that your dream home and dream car will be too expensive. Anyway it is good to have dream but donÂ’t blame others if you cant fulfil your dreams.
just the same, whether you cite high rise apartments or HDBs, on a per plot land basis, bungalow owners pay far less than what the piece of land is collectively worth to an entire block of condominium / HDB residents. so the issue persists, why are we subsidising bungalow owners?
Are you suggesting that ideally everyone in Singapore should be living in a flat of the same size and same plot ratio and there shall not be any swimming pool or garden as it takes up a lot of space.
Are you living in the communist world by friend? -
Originally posted by Gazelle:
Is our discussion still focusing on existing or new homeowners?
isn't that obvious? why should existing homeowners who are comfortably settled down bother so much about property price hikes?
If it is the latter, all I can say is that it is a luxury to be living in centralized HDB estate especially for young couples that has just started out to work.
many couples wish to stay near their parents who have been staying in matured estates all their lives so it is not out of luxury but rather out of family ties that they choose to stay within the same matured estates. this is what i've been saying all along and i wonder why you never seem to comprehend.
besides, what you're effectively saying is that we ordinary singaporeans should count ourselves lucky to get an HDB in any of the far flung corners of Singapore even though on a per plot of land basis, we collectively pay more for our flats than what a rich man pays for his bukit timah bungalow. some kind of luxury indeed.
And please also take into consideration the 30 to 40K grant government is giving for 1st time HDB flat buyers.
do we get an additional $15K grant during times of property market booms like now? if not, then we're still paying that extra $15K for nothing aren't we?
Where you live really depends on where you work, where you grew up and the kind of lifestyle you want.. E.g Some people like East Coast, Joo Chiat areas, but some find it too crowded an noisy. Some people prefer to spend less time traveling, hence would prefer to live closer to work place.
what if i work in Jurong and my wife works in Changi? we buy two houses and do teleconferencing every night? or one of us has to change job? more likely than not, it is the other way round, where you work depends on where you live. since all the affordable housing are located in the far flung corners of singapore, it forces ordinary folks to the peripheries of the island that severely constrains the choice of work that they can pursue ... or they'll have to contend with long travelling distances.
our transportation woes are due in no small part to the inadequacy in the planning of housing and work places. when you place them far apart, you are sure to compound travelling issues.
Given a choice, I am sure most people would like to live in Nassim Hill bungalow isnÂ’t it? but the only problem is you cant afford it.
bullshit. as ordinary folks go, staying in bungalows is an impossibility that few would waste time dreaming about.
Price hike in not confined to matured estates, they are confine mostly to freehold prime properties and estate near the IRs.
not true, prices in matured estates are feeling the pressure too.
What makes you so sure that HDB prices in Singapore will continue to grow by 5% every year?
the more pertinent question to ask is how long more will the current price increase continue and will the price increase increase even further. i don't know but i'm sure it won't fizzle out by the end of the year.
Suppose if you are buying a 99 leasehold property, do you want to see your proper depreciate over time, or do you prefer to at least maintain the value over time?
good, you're finally making some sense. what we need is for property prices to remain stable or at least not increase at a rate that is faster than inflation adjusted salary increase.
What do you mean that you are not concern about the original price? 5% of 400K and 5% of 200K is a difference of $10K per year? And if you are taking home loan of 400K vs 200K you will be paying twice the amount for mortgage and interests. As long as you are living in the leasehold property, you can only benefit if your property appreciate faster than the depreciation rate.
think you're really confused. the original price of the house is $300K. whether you pay for it now or over 25 years, it is still $300K in today's price. but because of the property boom, the price becomes $315K. whether you pay the extra $15K today or over 25 years, it is still $15K today.
but paper gain on property is part of your asset in your balance sheet and it is not something that is as volatile as stock market that will be wipe off overnight.
so? can you eat paper gain?
Suppose when you are about 55 to 60 years old, and you decided to move in to live with your children, the property that you holding will be a decent retirement fund.
this is a fantasy that no longer holds true in the context of our society today. you do a simple poll and find out how many women are prepared to stay with their in-laws. the best we can do is stay near our parents.
As a matter of fact, there are people in Singapore that shift every 5 years, sometime they downgrade to cash in on the gain and sometime the upgrade to pamper themselves.
are these the rarity or the norm? -
Originally posted by Gazelle:
Can you show us the price fluctuation of HDB flats for the past 10 years and compare it with the salary trend or Singapore or young couple for the same period.? DonÂ’t you think that is a foolish to use 1 yearÂ’s of grow rate of 5% to extrapolate into the future?
why past 10 years? why not past 20 years or since independence? how much did our fathers pay for their flats? how much were their salaries then? how much have prices of flats multiplied by now? how much have our salaries grown?
to even have the idea that salaries have increased faster than price of flats is indeed foolish.
Do you think it is fair for an economist to use statistic from 2001 to 2006 to compare with the currently economic situation? Can you remember when was Singapore biggest recession since independent?
it is fair if you understand the numbers. the property price index actually slumped over the recession period to well below the index of 100. it is now around 105. if our goal is, to quote you "to at least maintain the value over time", then what we should be aiming for is 100, not 105.
Please support your argument that majority of the NTU grad from 2006 are accountants?
you mean you can't even comprehend this simple logic and need figures to see the truth?
And is a boom in financial sector a zero sum game for our economy? Or is because you dont get to enjoy it, you dont think it is important?
it isn't zero sum but neither does it carry a multiplier effect of 7,500. since when did i say it is unimportant? how do you know i am not enjoying it? even if i'm enjoying it, do i adopt an attitude that since i'm doing fine i shouldn't care less about the plight of others? selfish isn't it?
Mind if I ask you are working in which industry?
no but why should you care?
Please keep the government pay discussion outside this threat because that is a different subject all together and it has already been discussed to many times over.
not discussing about govt pay, just using it as an example to show u why our govt, in paying itself millions, is different from other govts.
What I am saying is that FT population in Singapore is something that is within our governmentÂ’s control. Yes or No?
yes but still we have some of the highest immigration rates in this world.
Singapore is only a 40 plus year old multi cultural country, all it takes is one generation to turn these “New Immigrant” to be the same Singaporeans as you and me.
you sound like a cement mixer who thinks he can continously pour water into the cement to get more concrete. when would you ever get concrete? 40 years may seem short for a nation, but it is half a lifetime for most people.
there is a fundamental difference between then and now which our leaders don't seem to understand. back then, china and india were poor whereas singapore was more prosperous so its an obvious choice to settle here. the situation is different now. many chinese and indian cities are just as prosperous so the gap has narrowed. as long as wages remain higher here, they'll continue to come to make money. because living standards have been raised back home, they will have no qualms going back once they've made enough money.
So dont think that being a singaporeans is going to make you such a big deal in this country, especially i you are incapable for contributing to this country.
your satement above is the perfect answer to your next question "Could you give us an example of government discounting Singaporeans, and glorifying foreigners."
if even a bozo like you thinks that singaporeans are 'no big deal' what more can we expect from our govt?
i'm not sure if i can contribute more to this country, but from what i can see, i don't contribute any less than you in this topic / issue.
Could you give us an example of government discounting Singaporeans, and glorifying foreigners.
Chartered semicon was headed by someone called Whitbread I think. he was paid millions of dollars of bonuses for leading Chartered semicon to years after years of losses. can't remember the exact details but this is an excellent example for you. there are a lot more that i came across in one of the threads here some years back.
Do you expect to see a continual 5% surge in HDB price for the next 5 to 10 years?
do you expect the boom to end by the end of the year?
Do you think an influx of rich people and booming tourism industry will benefits the taxi drivers?
you sound as though some Arab sheik is coming here and will employ an entire fleet of taxis to service him. more likelt than not 10 rich people is needed to support every additional taxi driver. so the "create alot of opportunity for people who have less paper qualification" is pure crap.
Do you know how many % of Comfortdelgro is own by Temasek? And who owns Temasek?
more than enough if you consider all the affiliated GLCs. you don't know?
Are you referring to HDB price island wide or just prime area HDB? What past experience are you referring to? Is the current surge in property price driven by the same factor in the past?
just look at the past trends, its available in some government website. have you ever seen any price boom that ends as immediately as it started? some factors are the same, like improving economy. other factors are not the same, like artificial injection of foreign talents.
You are not answering my question; you are simply diverting your attention on FT again.
bullshit, i give straight answers that are pertinent to the issue. FT is not a diversion but an integral part of the issue. we have limited land space and housing. you squeeze more people here naturally property prices will escalate.
My question is, does a boom in the service industry contribute to a surge in property price and vice versa.
it depends. suppose all our grandpas and grandmas become more sophisticated and can handle calls better than indians do and multinationals decided that singapore is a good place to start call centres. you would have a boom in the service sector without a boom in the property market, because our grandpas and grandmas have their own houses to begin with.
as for the reverse, it also depends. if it requires 5 condominiums X 25 floors X 3 families per floor = 375 foreign talent families to employ 5 security guards + 10 non-bhangra estate workers + 1 grass cutter, then the answer is no, property price spike will not contribute to boom in service sector. i believe we're in this situation now.
Before you point your fingers at those immigrants for causing the strain on property price, you might want to take a look at Singaporeans kiasu attitude in buying property first. Have you forgotten how Singaporeans queue over night for new property launches in the 90s?
but why would kiasu singaporeans snap up properties in the first place? it is in anticipation of the huge herd of foreign talents that are being warmly invited to come here isn't it?
if you want to kerb queueing, you would have to cool the property market and the best way is to balance supply and demand. until we build enough houses, or release more land for that purpose, let's not futher overcrowd this place. -
Originally posted by Gazelle:
ThatÂ’s where you are wrong, high tech companies tend to prefer their manufacturing and R&D operation to be located in a country where it has the right infrastructure, the supporting industries and government support for IP protection and tax incentives. High tech manufacturing is different from mass production manufacturing that employs thousands of workers. High tech manufacturing requires higher level of skills and know-how and they are cannot be replace by cheaper unskilled work force.
i wasn't wrong, i was just thinking beyond the usual govt rhetorics that you just regurgitated. infrastructure can be easily built. china built one exactly like ours in suzhou. same for supporting industries and tax incentives. we may have advantage in IP protection now but there's no reason why china's IP protection won't improve as its economy and society rapidly improves. high tech manufacturing essentially involves more automation which can be more readily mastered than acquiring a standard of english acceptable to americans.
In the service industry, there is a front office that deals directly with customers and they is also the back office. Hence it is not right to assume the you need all these attributes to be working in the service industry.
why do you think the largest providers of back office operations are in india and the phillipines? for the obvious reason of english isn't it? so even when you consider the back office, language is an impt advantage so i wasn't wrong or assuming things but pointing out the obvious truth.
a) You donÂ’t buy a car everyday, but you have to eat 3 to 4 times a day, 365 days per year. Hence what does Ferrari has to do with eating?
but one person like you isn't going to employ 365 cooks to cook for you solely. what would they do for the rest of the year? more likely than not, a small number of cooks will be cooking for a much number of people which means that you'd need a large number of rich FTs just to employ a small number of cooks. hence, as in the case of the ferrari, eating isn't going to "create alot of opportunity for people who have less paper qualification".
Plus besides eating there are still tons of things that require service too.
like?
b) I was saying that service industry will create job opportunity to those unskills and less educated. I did not say that service industry catering ONLY for the rich would create enough job opportunity to those less skills and less educated.
isn't your title "wooing the super rich"? so what's the point of concluding that at the end of the day, it is actually the local masses that "create alot of opportunity for people who have less paper qualification" and not super rich foreigners? aren't you defeating your own motion then?
I would say at least 50 permanent staffs to maintain a good size apartment that comes with full facilities, and also contractors that provide pool cleaning, gym maintenance, gardening, etc.
5 condominiums X 25 floors X 3 families per floor = 375 foreign talent families just to employ 50 perm staff +++?
so much for your "create alot of opportunity for people who have less paper qualification" falsehood.
How many households that need to fill those condominium is not really an issue or concern because as long as the apartment has got its TOP, irregardless of the occupancy rate, everything will have to be maintained.
but if the condominiums are empty, how would it lead to "an influx of rich people ... will benefits the taxi drivers"? how would empty condominiums support your argument that "... restaurant ... requires service staffs such as chef, dish washer, waiters and waitresses, kitchen staffs, PR manager, cashier etc"?
you mean our "grand" strategy of "wooing the super rich" is actually based on creating empty ghost towns?
FTs are attracted to Singapore not imported
in your own words, "FT population in Singapore is something that is within our governmentÂ’s control." so while FTs may be attracted, it is up to our govt to admit or reject them. so saying that the FTs are attracted is only half the truth, for they could be rejected. it is more like import because of the ambitious target of 6.5 million set by the govt and the active "wooing" all around the world.
and you donÂ’t need to be living in Singapore to buy property in Singapore, just like Singaporeans buying property in Australia, Malaysia etc. Hence if this is not a case of supply and demand, what is?
but you don't find australia and malaysia going all out to woo foreign talent and boosting their populations by one third do you? there may be opportunistic buyers from overseas but the opporturnities they seek is in our rapidly rising property prices which is in turn caused by govt's overzealous wooing of FTs. so it isn't just a simple case of supply and demand.
a) You are against FT, but you want them to build your house. Who do you tink you are? King?
you are making a baseless accusation against me. to engage in smearing isn't how a gentleman conducts himself.
b) Singapore government does not import FT, it is the companies that invested in Singapore that attracts them to our shore.
so the govt target of 6.5 million really isn't the govt's target but rather those of MNCs? who are you kidding? -
Originally posted by Gazelle:
c) Is a boom in construction industry good for Singapore? Yes or No?
it depends. if it grows at a natural pace commensurate with economy, inflation and wages, i think it would be normal. if it spurts suddenly induced by artificial injection of FTs, it would not be healthy and whatever good would only be transient.
Your opinion is essentially focusing on yourself wanting to buy prime property, but unwilling to pay a premium.
throughout the entire discussion, my focus has always been on HDB so your accusation is unfounded. do you always resort to smearing when you run out of good arguments?
And you argument has never been about the people who have been struggling to find a stable job in Singapore, and instead you are always blaming the rich FT that is pushing up the price of your dream home and dream car.
job stability has been included in this discussion though not to a great extent. from our discussion, we can see that rich FT will not significantly increase the employment of "people who have been struggling to find a stable job". so if importing FT is the only 'bright' idea our 'talented' govt has to "create alot of opportunity for people who have less paper qualification", then i'm afraid is all showmanship and no substance.
Inflation is something that is going to hit Singapore just like it is going to hit other countries regardless if there is a IR or not.
what we're saying here is beyond inflation. what we're saying is "wooing the super rich" contributes to property price hikes.
The main culprit? Oil companies, mining companies, shipping companies etc.
not true, increasing oil price depresses economy, reduces wages, reduces consumer buying confidence which tends to cool property speculation
a) Expensive restaurant is unlikely to be located in shopping malls because there is a lack of privacy and exclusivity. Hence what you have been speculating are baseless assumptions.
but isn't Le Amis located in a shopping mall in scotts? hence my assumptions are perfectly legitimate while your accusations are indeed base.
b) In any restaurant regardless highend or lowend you would requires service staffs such as chef, dish washer, waiters and waitresses, kitchen staffs, PR manager, cashier etc. So why are you making the assumption that only highend restaurant can contribute to that?
as mentioned above, if singaporeans are the main patrons of restaurants, then the argument that "wooing the super rich" would bring about "alot of opportunity for people who have less paper qualification" would be a complete sham
Oh, I didnÂ’t know that people who are complaining stagnant in salary are also bidding for high CC category, and buying big petrol guzzling MPV. I thought those are luxury items rather than necessity?
the 'complaint' wasn't about stagnant salary but that of property prices rising faster than salaries can keep up.
many of the MPVs are not much more expensive than mid sized sedans so if they are considered 'luxury items', then just about any mid sized sedan would be considered 'luxurious' for ordinary folks. so going by your definition, 90% of singaporeans shouldn't be owning cars.
Your argument is that rich man buying Ferraris and Bentley is going to push up the price for COE, not if buying Ferrari will create enough job for the people with less qualification.
you don't even understand what you're replying to. when i say that you need a lot more rich people to create jobs for just a handful of people with less qualifications, i am debunking your assertion that rich people buying ferraris would "create alot of opportunity for people who have less paper qualification".
Would appreciate if you donÂ’t lump everything today just because you are unable to defend your point.
i wasn't lumping things together. i was merely using your own arguments to point out the inconsistencies of your logic. furthermore, i wasn't defending my point, i was merely refuting yours. do not pretend to not understand my arguments if you are incapable of defending your own.
Common sense tells me that if REIT are driven by influx of rich people into Singapore, these REITs should be buying up prime shopping mall along orchard road. Could you tell us how many of those prime shopping mall actually own by REITs.
but common sense should also tell you that not all prime shopping malls are listed and can be conveniently bought off the shelf.
REITs are not something that is confined to only Singapore, hence could you explain why they are also REITs in country where they donÂ’t have such influx of rich people?
should the fact that REITs exist all over the world imply that all property markets should boom at the same time?
You are making a fundamentally wrong assumption that there will be no new shopping malls (in this case resources) and they will be a major shortage of retail space in Singapore.
Do you know how many new shopping malls is coming up around Singapore?
it doesn't matter that there are many new shopping centres sprouting out in anticipation of FTs and IRs. all of them would be attempting to extract as much shopping dollars as they can to cover the huge development costs which would invariably push prices up.
That segment of population whom are bidding for such COE are people who have benefit from the economic boom, so I donÂ’t see why the government should be concern.
the role that the govt plays as i've said so many times is their opening of the flood gates for foreign talents that increases demand for COEs more than our already crowded roads can support.
The possible reason why this is bordering you is because you are worried that your dream home and dream car will be too expensive. Anyway it is good to have dream but donÂ’t blame others if you cant fulfil your dreams.
another groundless accusation that merely reflects your baseness.
Are you suggesting that ideally everyone in Singapore should be living in a flat of the same size and same plot ratio and there shall not be any swimming pool or garden as it takes up a lot of space.
no, even when you factor in common spaces like swimming pools, the price that high rise dwellers pay collectively per plot of land is still more than what a bungalow owners pays.
Are you living in the communist world by friend?
any difference? man still exploits man -
Originally posted by snow leopard:
many couples wish to stay near their parents who have been staying in matured estates all their lives so it is not out of luxury but rather out of family ties that they choose to stay within the same matured estates. this is what i've been saying all along and i wonder why you never seem to comprehend.
besides, what you're effectively saying is that we ordinary singaporeans should count ourselves lucky to get an HDB in any of the far flung corners of Singapore even though on a per plot of land basis, we collectively pay more for our flats than what a rich man pays for his bukit timah bungalow. some kind of luxury indeed.
And because of these peopleÂ’s preference, HDB prices in matured estate have to remain flat forever so that the offspring or their offspring can afford to stay together.
Is that what you are trying to say?
do we get an additional $15K grant during times of property market booms like now? if not, then we're still paying that extra $15K for nothing aren't we?
A 5 room HDB used to cost $25K about 25 years ago. Are you saying that if you buy a similar size HDB flat at $300K today, you are paying $275K “extra” for nothing?
A bowl of mee pok used to cost around $0.50 about 30 years ago should you start protesting and stop eating because you are paying $2.50 extra for nothing?
what if i work in Jurong and my wife works in Changi? we buy two houses and do teleconferencing every night? or one of us has to change job? more likely than not, it is the other way round, where you work depends on where you live. since all the affordable housing are located in the far flung corners of singapore, it forces ordinary folks to the peripheries of the island that severely constrains the choice of work that they can pursue ... or they'll have to contend with long travelling distances.
Really? So I presume that majority of the people working along Orchard Road are also living in Orchard Road, and if you are a waiter in a restaurant along orchard road, you should deserved to be living at Orchard Road, isnÂ’t?
bull!!*&. as ordinary folks go, staying in bungalows is an impossibility that few would waste time dreaming about.
Just like what you are saying, given a CHOICE you would prefer to stay where you want to stay, so instead of just stopping at matured HDB estate or near you parents bull crap, why donÂ’t you choose Nassim Hill bungalow instead?
not true, prices in matured estates are feeling the pressure too.
What sort of pressure are you talking about because pressure is a relative word and it mean nothing if you canÂ’t quantify it.
the more pertinent question to ask is how long more will the current price increase continue and will the price increase increase even further. i don't know but i'm sure it won't fizzle out by the end of the year.
And just because of 2 year of rise in property sector after about 10 years of slump, you are making so much noise?
good, you're finally making some sense. what we need is for property prices to remain stable or at least not increase at a rate that is faster than inflation adjusted salary increase.
Is that just your selfish thought? And please have you forgotten the biggest cost component in buying house is servicing the mortgage? Obviously you know nuts about this isnÂ’t it?
think you're really confused. the original price of the house is $300K. whether you pay for it now or over 25 years, it is still $300K in today's price. but because of the property boom, the price becomes $315K. whether you pay the extra $15K today or over 25 years, it is still $15K today.
Yar, I forgotten that the cheapest HDB flat in Singapore is around $300K, hence this is probably the minimum you could go for buy a HDB flat right?
so? can you eat paper gain?
You cant eat money and precious metal either, can you?
this is a fantasy that no longer holds true in the context of our society today. you do a simple poll and find out how many women are prepared to stay with their in-laws. the best we can do is stay near our parents.
You mean Singapore men have to place their wifeÂ’s preference before their aging parents? Are you talking about yourself and your family or the majority of Singaporeans?
are these the rarity or the norm?
This depends of the property market and the economy, and yes very normal. -
Originally posted by snow leopard:
why past 10 years? why not past 20 years or since independence? how much did our fathers pay for their flats? how much were their salaries then? how much have prices of flats multiplied by now? how much have our salaries grown?
to even have the idea that salaries have increased faster than price of flats is indeed foolish.
Since we are talking about the future. I donÂ’t think it make any sense to compare a develop country to a fishing village.
Your concern has been, because of 1 year of 5% rise in HDB property you are anticipating that this will affect our the ability of young couple buying HDB flat in future. Hence my question to you is that, can you use 1 single point to plot a trend into the future?
it is fair if you understand the numbers. the property price index actually slumped over the recession period to well below the index of 100. it is now around 105. if our goal is, to quote you "to at least maintain the value over time", then what we should be aiming for is 100, not 105.
Did you know that the 100 reference point used to be a 105 sometime ago and todayÂ’s 105 point mark would be 100 marks in the future. I am wondering if you could explain, why an economy need to be aiming for 100 instead of above 100?
you mean you can't even comprehend this simple logic and need figures to see the
truth?
Yes, I cannot understand why you say that majority of NTU grad in 2006 are accountants. Would you be kind enough to give us some datas
it isn't zero sum but neither does it carry a multiplier effect of 7,500. since when did i say it is unimportant? how do you know i am not enjoying it? even if i'm enjoying it, do i adopt an attitude that since i'm doing fine i shouldn't care less about the plight of others? selfish isn't it?
I am just rebutting your claim that there are no real wage increases in Singapore, just because you prefer to exclude civil servants and people working in the financial sector. Hence what is your basis that job creation and wage increase in financial and government sectors are not important.
no but why should you care?
Because we want to know what F-type industry you are in so others can avoid following your foot steps.
yes but still we have some of the highest immigration rates in this world.
What I am asking is yes or no. and I donÂ’t see why having highest immigration rate is not expected from one of the fastest growing country in the past 30 to 40 years.
you sound like a cement mixer who thinks he can continously pour water into the cement to get more concrete. when would you ever get concrete? 40 years may seem short for a nation, but it is half a lifetime for most people.
there is a fundamental difference between then and now which our leaders don't seem to understand. back then, china and india were poor whereas singapore was more prosperous so its an obvious choice to settle here. the situation is different now. many chinese and indian cities are just as prosperous so the gap has narrowed. as long as wages remain higher here, they'll continue to come to make money. because living standards have been raised back home, they will have no qualms going back once they've made enough money.
You are saying that Singapore is more prosperous than the whole of China and India. Would you mind telling us: -
a) When was this
b) How much more is more.
c) Did you grandfather move back to cities Shanghai or HK after they made a fortune in Singapore?
your satement above is the perfect answer to your next question "Could you give us an example of government discounting Singaporeans, and glorifying foreigners."
NahÂ…there is a difference between government discounting Singaporeans and Singaporeans deserve to be discounted.
if even a bozo like you thinks that singaporeans are 'no big deal' what more can we expect from our govt?
Please donÂ’t put words into my mouth, I am discounting Singaporeans like you who thinks that the world must stop and wait for you to buy your dream home and dream car. -
Originally posted by snow leopard:
i'm not sure if i can contribute more to this country, but from what i can see, i don't contribute any less than you in this topic / issue.
Do you actually believe that you can contribute to this country talking nonsense in this forum?
Chartered semicon was headed by someone called Whitbread I think. he was paid millions of dollars of bonuses for leading Chartered semicon to years after years of losses. can't remember the exact details but this is an excellent example for you. there are a lot more that i came across in one of the threads here some years back.
Would appreciate if you could provide more information about this CEO you are talking about and his pay package, or else there is no basis for discussion.
do you expect the boom to end by the end of the year?
Is there a need for concern to see 2 years of growth after 10 years of slump?
If you cant see beyond this year, than who could you make the statement that the property boom in the 80s and 90s was because Singapore anticipated an influx of FT to Singapore.
you sound as though some Arab sheik is coming here and will employ an entire fleet of taxis to service him. more likelt than not 10 rich people is needed to support every additional taxi driver. so the "create alot of opportunity for people who have less paper qualification" is pure crap.
My question to you is, does an influx of rich peoples and a booming tourist industry benefit taxi drivers? Yes or No?
more than enough if you consider all the affiliated GLCs. you don't know?
If you donÂ’t know how much shareholding Temasek has in Comfortdelgro, than how can you say that majority of the companyÂ’s earning will go to government and not other shareholders?
just look at the past trends, its available in some government website. have you ever seen any price boom that ends as immediately as it started? some factors are the same, like improving economy. other factors are not the same, like artificial injection of foreign talents.
Would appreciate if you could be more specific about which piece of information you are referring to from government website. As far as I am aware, the current surge in property prices are not island wide and that is something fundamentally different from what we see in the past. So I would like to ask, what other factors are the same besides giving me the lame answer like “improving economy”
bull^#^*, i give straight answers that are pertinent to the issue. FT is not a diversion but an integral part of the issue. we have limited land space and housing. you squeeze more people here naturally property prices will escalate.
I am simply questioning your view that booms in service industry will contributes to a surge in property price and vice versa. Hence I donÂ’t see why you should divert your attention to FT. Plus, unless you know how many unsold housing and unused land are left in Singapore, if not I donÂ’t see how you can make the judgment that the supply of housing in Singapore is limited.
it depends. suppose all our grandpas and grandmas become more sophisticated and can handle calls better than indians do and multinationals decided that singapore is a good place to start call centres. you would have a boom in the service sector without a boom in the property market, because our grandpas and grandmas have their own houses to begin with.
as for the reverse, it also depends. if it requires 5 condominiums X 25 floors X 3 families per floor = 375 foreign talent families to employ 5 security guards + 10 non-bhangra estate workers + 1 grass cutter, then the answer is no, property price spike will not contribute to boom in service sector. i believe we're in this situation now.
I donÂ’t see a need to reply to your grandfather story.
but why would kiasu singaporeans snap up properties in the first place? it is in anticipation of the huge herd of foreign talents that are being warmly invited to come here isn't it?
if you want to kerb queueing, you would have to cool the property market and the best way is to balance supply and demand. until we build enough houses, or release more land for that purpose, let's not futher overcrowd this place.
Could you explain why there is such a drastic surge in property price in the 80s and 90s? It is because Singaporeans can anticipate the economy of Singapore 20 years in advance?
When you say there is a huge herd in FT in Singapore I am sure you must have read the statistic on the growth % of FT in Singapore. As such, could you give us a brief of what it the growth rate of FT in Singapore from 1990 to 2006 -
Originally posted by snow leopard:
i wasn't wrong, i was just thinking beyond the usual govt rhetorics that you just regurgitated. infrastructure can be easily built. china built one exactly like ours in suzhou. same for supporting industries and tax incentives. we may have advantage in IP protection now but there's no reason why china's IP protection won't improve as its economy and society rapidly improves. high tech manufacturing essentially involves more automation which can be more readily mastered than acquiring a standard of english acceptable to americans.
I was rebutting your claim that there is no difference between high tech manufacturing and low tech manufacturing in Singapore. If you think so highly of China, can you tell us when do you think they will be able to provide the same IP protection in Singapore?
why do you think the largest providers of back office operations are in india and the phillipines? for the obvious reason of english isn't it? so even when you consider the back office, language is an impt advantage so i wasn't wrong or assuming things but pointing out the obvious truth.
If you are referring to the tele-marketing and customer service hotline, even though they are not physically with the customers, they still have direct contact with the customers, and this is only one segment of the service industry.
but one person like you isn't going to employ 365 cooks to cook for you solely. what would they do for the rest of the year? more likely than not, a small number of cooks will be cooking for a much number of people which means that you'd need a large number of rich FTs just to employ a small number of cooks. hence, as in the case of the ferrari, eating isn't going to "create alot of opportunity for people who have less paper qualification".
I am just rebutting your claim that these rich people doesnÂ’t create job and the service industry is not important to this country.
What does the chef do after cooking? What dumb question is that?
like?
SPA, gym, golf courses, dance, café, night clubs, insurance, etc
isn't your title "wooing the super rich"? so what's the point of concluding that at the end of the day, it is actually the local masses that "create alot of opportunity for people who have less paper qualification" and not super rich foreigners? aren't you defeating your own motion then?
5 condominiums X 25 floors X 3 families per floor = 375 foreign talent families just to employ 50 perm staff +++?
so much for your "create alot of opportunity for people who have less paper qualification" falsehood.
Again, you are twisting the facts and arguing like a child.
I am just rebutting your claim that influx of rich doesnÂ’t benefit Singaporeans. Period!!
but if the condominiums are empty, how would it lead to "an influx of rich people ... will benefits the taxi drivers"? how would empty condominiums support your argument that "... restaurant ... requires service staffs such as chef, dish washer, waiters and waitresses, kitchen staffs, PR manager, cashier etc"?
you mean our "grand" strategy of "wooing the super rich" is actually based on creating empty ghost towns?
Stop twisting my words, did I say influx of rich only or did I say influx of rich and booming tourist industry that benefit taxi drivers? And please taxi and occupancy rate of condominium has no relationship.
in your own words, "FT population in Singapore is something that is within our governmentÂ’s control." so while FTs may be attracted, it is up to our govt to admit or reject them. so saying that the FTs are attracted is only half the truth, for they could be rejected. it is more like import because of the ambitious target of 6.5 million set by the govt and the active "wooing" all around the world.
Are you saying that if your wife has had many suitors in the past, she is actually importing man into her life 50% of the time?
but you don't find australia and malaysia going all out to woo foreign talent and boosting their populations by one third do you? there may be opportunistic buyers from overseas but the opporturnities they seek is in our rapidly rising property prices which is in turn caused by govt's overzealous wooing of FTs. so it isn't just a simple case of supply and demand.
Are you sure the Australia and Malaysia are not wooing foreign talents and rich people? Have you check how much the property prices in Australia have risen over the years?
Please get your facts right before talking.
you are making a baseless accusation against me. to engage in smearing isn't how gentleman conducts himself.
baseless? I think you better read what you wrote. Or should I give you a list of what you have said? -
Originally posted by Gazelle:
And because of these peopleÂ’s preference, HDB prices in matured estate have to remain flat forever so that the offspring or their offspring can afford to stay together.
Is that what you are trying to say?
not just any whimsical preference but good, well intentioned preference to stay near parents. filial piety is important for asians and many pious children in outskirt towns also choose to stay near parents within the same towns. so its not just matured estates like you said but all estates throughout singapore. not flat but rather not shooting up at a rate much faster than salaries can keep up.
A 5 room HDB used to cost $25K about 25 years ago. Are you saying that if you buy a similar size HDB flat at $300K today, you are paying $275K “extra” for nothing?
from $25K to $300K, price of flats have increased by 12 times! whereas salaries may have only doubled over the same period. so comparing prices of flats and salaries, we are now paying 6 times as much as our fathers used to pay so we're paying an extra 500% for nothing!
A bowl of mee pok used to cost around $0.50 about 30 years ago should you start protesting and stop eating because you are paying $2.50 extra for nothing?
price of mee pok is small compared to salary or price of HDB so there's no reason not to eat it. furthermore, if mee pok truly became exhorbitant, we can always eat mee siam instead. but if HDB becomes too expensive where are we going to stay? bungalows?
Really? So I presume that majority of the people working along Orchard Road are also living in Orchard Road, and if you are a waiter in a restaurant along orchard road, you should deserved to be living at Orchard Road, isnÂ’t?
but this contradicts what you wrote earlier "Where you live really depends on where you work".
Just like what you are saying, given a CHOICE you would prefer to stay where you want to stay, so instead of just stopping at matured HDB estate or near you parents bull crap, why donÂ’t you choose Nassim Hill bungalow instead?
why should my preference to stay near parents have anything to do with Nassim Hill bungalow?
What sort of pressure are you talking about because pressure is a relative word and it mean nothing if you canÂ’t quantify it.
two months ago, prices around my area is $330K. It is $360K now. $30K increase in 2 months, what more quantification do you need?
And just because of 2 year of rise in property sector after about 10 years of slump, you are making so much noise?
so i should wait for the next slump 10 years later to buy a house?
Is that just your selfish thought? And please have you forgotten the biggest cost component in buying house is servicing the mortgage? Obviously you know nuts about this isnÂ’t it?
no, it's your own silly idea. i am in no way selfish because i am saying that prices of housing all over singapore should remain stable for all singaporeans. the morgage actually compounds the problem of property price hikes. whatever price hikes we're experiencing now will be compounded over the years through interest on interest. so because of interest, price hike now becomes an even bigger problem later.
Yar, I forgotten that the cheapest HDB flat in Singapore is around $300K, hence this is probably the minimum you could go for buy a HDB flat right?
it is the cheapest if i want to stay near my parents. do i have to constantly remind you?
You cant eat money and precious metal either, can you?
so? you can choose not to buy money or precious metal since you can't eat them. but whether or not you can eat property gains you still need a house to stay in. don't tell me you're using precious metal to build a kennel to stay in.
You mean Singapore men have to place their wifeÂ’s preference before their aging parents? Are you talking about yourself and your family or the majority of Singaporeans?
so if i have five siblings, all five of us plus siblings-in-laws will have to stay together with our ageing parents? of course i am talking about the majority of singaporeans. you on the other hand are talking crap.
This depends of the property market and the economy, and yes very normal.
i would say it is not normal