Ridiculous HDB Prices
-
Originally posted by likeyou:
Yes I wld love to buy one at jb.But several issue;
1) Must be easy accessible.
2) The price must be right.
3) The security must be right.
4) There must be no language barrier.
5) Transportation (at jb) is easy, just like spore.
6) Foods, markets, shopping center...near to the place I buy.
7) Lastly, let me check how much I left after forking out sgd$100K + renovations costs.
But, back to the top....if you are a sporean, how are you going to buy a bungolow there in the first place? There must be some form of procedures sporean need to fulfil right?
here are the details:
http://www.mm2h.gov.my/index.php
under the Malaysia My 2nd Home Scheme, you will be granted a 10yr social visit pass, for unlimited stay in Malaysia, renewable upon expiry.
Applicants aged below 50 years are required to show proof of liquid assets worth a minimum of RM500,000 and offshore income of RM10,000 per month.
Applicants aged 50 and above may comply with the financial proof of RM350,000 in liquid assets and off shore income of RM10,000 per month.
iii. New applicants who have purchased properties worth at least RM 1 million qualify to place a lower fixed deposit amount upon approval.
Upon Approval : Aged Below 50 years old
Open a fixed deposit account of RM300,000.00.
* After a period of one year, the participant can withdraw up to RM150,000.00 for approved expenses relating to house purchase, education for children in Malaysia and medical purposes.
_
House Purchase:
Please be informed that property purchase is not a pre-requisite for participating in MM2H programme.
Any foreigner may purchase any number of residential property in Malaysia, subject to the minimum rates established for foreigners by the different states. They start from RM500,000 per unit for most states, from 1st January 2010. Land is a state matter and it is important to check state laws before making any commitment, as the minimum purchase price is not standardised between states.Car Purchase:
Each participant is allowed to bring in his/her own personal car OR to purchase a locally-assembled car without the need to pay import duty, excise duty and sales tax.
____________________________________________________
in other words, you need to show proof that you have $208k in your bank (for 3 months) , and an income of $4168/month.
after you get approval to participate in the scheme, you have to open a fixed deposit account of $125k in Malaysia. From the fixed account, from the 2nd year onwards, you can withdraw half the amount for purposes such as home purchase, medical fees, and education etc.
it is not a pre-requisite to own a house in M'sia prior to application for the scheme. but they have raised the minimum property value for foreigners from RM250k (SGD$124k) to RM500k as for Jan 2010.
and under the scheme, you will be eligible to drive a M'sian car, e.g. proton, perodua, at M'sian prices, with no COE and the 200% import duty for singapore cars. But the downside is that you will not be allowed to drive your m'sian car into singapore, since singapore citizens and PRs are not allowed to drive M'sian cars within singapore.
i think you can get around the savings requirements:
ask your relatives to loan you money to place in your account for 3 months, to meet the RM500k requirement.
afterwards, get a loan for RM300k, for the fixed deposit, deposit into M'sian banks like Maybank, which has some presence in singapore.
after 1 yr, draw out RM150k to pay for M'sian house, and apply for bank loan if necessary.
there you go, the first step to owning your own bungalow.
but the main hurdle is:
1) meeting the income requirement of S$4.2k/month.
2) Save a considerable amount of money. e.g. S$125k? or at least enough to service your loan interest.
RM500k (S$208k) for a bungalow is still cheaper than a S$350k HDB 4 room flat.
-
Originally posted by βÎτά:
I really don't know what to say about you, I talk about direct causal relationship between new immigrants and housing. You compare that to your hot weather being related new immigrants.
You argue for the sake of arguing irrespective of the logic.
I look at a bigger picture. High economic growth brings in foreign workers, attracts hot money, increase local disposable income. Foreign workers need to stay, so rentals go up, making good return for property investment, so more people buy, and those who don't want to get caught in higher rental or lose out in the long run join the Q, local upgraders also believe that buying now is better than later, and hot money avoid the US and Europe and come to Asia, pushing the prices up, the chain reaction goes on.....In places like HK, where the foreign workers factor is less significant than here, but property prices go up regardless, because the future is bright!
The question is how to protect the new families and keep their first house within reach.
will stopping foreigner workers or immigrants halt the hike? not likely and it is not to anybody's benefit. We need to keep the government in check so that there is sufficient measures taken not to make the rich get richer from property, but blaming the foreigner or immigrants is just a venting of frustration.
Better to do the calculation right and make the right move.Some time later, if the bubble in china burst, and the US continues to struggle, economy will slow down, foreigners will leave, property prices will drop. If you can wait, that will be the right time to buy your house, but may be then you will blame the government for poor economic performance.
-
Originally posted by sgdiehard:
I look at a bigger picture. High economic growth brings in foreign workers, attracts hot money, increase local disposable income. Foreign workers need to stay, so rentals go up, making good return for property investment, so more people buy, and those who don't want to get caught in higher rental or lose out in the long run join the Q, local upgraders also believe that buying now is better than later, and hot money avoid the US and Europe and come to Asia, pushing the prices up, the chain reaction goes on.....In places like HK, where the foreign workers factor is less significant than here, but property prices go up regardless, because the future is bright!
The question is how to protect the new families and keep their first house within reach.
will stopping foreigner workers or immigrants halt the hike? not likely and it is not to anybody's benefit. We need to keep the government in check so that there is sufficient measures taken not to make the rich get richer from property, but blaming the foreigner or immigrants is just a venting of frustration.
Better to do the calculation right and make the right move.Some time later, if the bubble in china burst, and the US continues to struggle, economy will slow down, foreigners will leave, property prices will drop. If you can wait, that will be the right time to buy your house, but may be then you will blame the government for poor economic performance.
GDP growth?
All I see with this foreign workers issue is depressed salary and higher inflation. More foreign workers crowding out the Singaporean workers and more foreign workers inflating the cost of housing.
GDP growth usually means higher salaries, but something that was never achieved with this current trend of open door immigration policy.
-
-
Originally posted by βÎτά:
GDP growth?
All I see with this foreign workers issue is depressed salary and higher inflation. More foreign workers crowding out the Singaporean workers and more foreign workers inflating the cost of housing.
GDP growth usually means higher salaries, but something that was never achieved with this current trend of open door immigration policy.
too bad, or just sad that some people do not benefit from an economic growth. But without economic growth it will be more sad for more people.
-
Originally posted by βÎτά:
GDP growth?
All I see with this foreign workers issue is depressed salary and higher inflation. More foreign workers crowding out the Singaporean workers and more foreign workers inflating the cost of housing.
GDP growth usually means higher salaries, but something that was never achieved with this current trend of open door immigration policy.
exactly. when you remove the limit to the supply of labour, salary will never rise.
-
They talk about minimum wage distorting the market, I think it's more their policy of excessive foreign labour supply that is distorting the market.
-
I dun think so, i think it is the Minister's pay the withheld the introduction of min wage
-
i am amused by the reasons they gave against implementing a minimum wage law.
is it really too much to ask for $5/hr minimum pay? anything less than that is exploitation, as it offers a pay that is below par with the country's standard of living.
i dun see how adversely it could affect the competitiveness of our economy, when it only benefits the lowest-income group in our society. but not implementing a minimum wage law, it in fact allows this disadvantaged group of people to go free-fall in terms of wage.
if companies like Mcdonalds can get away with $4.50/hr wages yesterday, $3.50/hr wage today, without any minimum wage law, it can try to get away with a $2.50/hr wage tomorrow. do we want that to happen?
and furthermore, how big can the affected group of people be? in a typical company, people who currently make less than $5 a day are the cleaners, and in fact, only the cleaners. these are really the group of people who really needs and appreciates a payrise, for the wage they receive now are not proportional to the amount of work they are doing now. try cleaning the entire office yourself, and you will see how tough it is.
not to mention that part-time maids, who are essentially doing the same jobs as these full-time cleaners, are paid at an avg rate of $10/hr. and to make a comparison, our fulltime cleaners, often the elderly, are underpaid by 50%. this is a gross injustice in pay.
and if you want to argue about competitiveness, how many cleaners does a company employs anyway? and surely they can afford to pay the cleaners and other low-wage workers more, especially when singapore just posted a record double digit growth this year.
and even with increased operation costs due to a mandatory minimum pay, companies will still need to retain the service of these individuals. you still need people to clean the building right, unless the management is willing to clean the building themselves.
those holding essential jobs will still be employed, e.g. technician, repairman, security guards.etc. their services are still required no matter the state of the economy.
also, those holding non-essential jobs will be laid off, i agree, but this only help to boost productivity, doing away with unproductive jobs, channeling labour into more productive industries.
-
Originally posted by deathmaster:
i am amused by the reasons they gave against implementing a minimum wage law.
is it really too much to ask for $5/hr minimum pay? anything less than that is exploitation, as it offers a pay that is below par with the country's standard of living.
i dun see how adversely it could affect the competitiveness of our economy, when it only benefits the lowest-income group in our society. but not implementing a minimum wage law, it in fact allows this disadvantaged group of people to go free-fall in terms of wage.
if companies like Mcdonalds can get away with $4.50/hr wages yesterday, $3.50/hr wage today, without any minimum wage law, it can try to get away with a $2.50/hr wage tomorrow. do we want that to happen?
and furthermore, how big can the affected group of people be? in a typical company, people who currently make less than $5 a day are the cleaners, and in fact, only the cleaners. these are really the group of people who really needs and appreciates a payrise, for the wage they receive now are not proportional to the amount of work they are doing now. try cleaning the entire office yourself, and you will see how tough it is.
not to mention that part-time maids, who are essentially doing the same jobs as these full-time cleaners, are paid at an avg rate of $10/hr. and to make a comparison, our fulltime cleaners, often the elderly, are underpaid by 50%. this is a gross injustice in pay.
and if you want to argue about competitiveness, how many cleaners does a company employs anyway? and surely they can afford to pay the cleaners and other low-wage workers more, especially when singapore just posted a record double digit growth this year.
and even with increased operation costs due to a mandatory minimum pay, companies will still need to retain the service of these individuals. you still need people to clean the building right, unless the management is willing to clean the building themselves.
those holding essential jobs will still be employed, e.g. technician, repairman, security guards.etc. their services are still required no matter the state of the economy.
also, those holding non-essential jobs will be laid off, i agree, but this only help to boost productivity, doing away with unproductive jobs, channeling labour into more productive industries.
They will tell you that life will kick you in the balls.
And that you should get out of their elite uncaring faces.
-
Originally posted by deathmaster:
i am amused by the reasons they gave against implementing a minimum wage law.
is it really too much to ask for $5/hr minimum pay? anything less than that is exploitation, as it offers a pay that is below par with the country's standard of living.
i dun see how adversely it could affect the competitiveness of our economy, when it only benefits the lowest-income group in our society. but not implementing a minimum wage law, it in fact allows this disadvantaged group of people to go free-fall in terms of wage.
if companies like Mcdonalds can get away with $4.50/hr wages yesterday, $3.50/hr wage today, without any minimum wage law, it can try to get away with a $2.50/hr wage tomorrow. do we want that to happen?
and furthermore, how big can the affected group of people be? in a typical company, people who currently make less than $5 a day are the cleaners, and in fact, only the cleaners. these are really the group of people who really needs and appreciates a payrise, for the wage they receive now are not proportional to the amount of work they are doing now. try cleaning the entire office yourself, and you will see how tough it is.
not to mention that part-time maids, who are essentially doing the same jobs as these full-time cleaners, are paid at an avg rate of $10/hr. and to make a comparison, our fulltime cleaners, often the elderly, are underpaid by 50%. this is a gross injustice in pay.
and if you want to argue about competitiveness, how many cleaners does a company employs anyway? and surely they can afford to pay the cleaners and other low-wage workers more, especially when singapore just posted a record double digit growth this year.
and even with increased operation costs due to a mandatory minimum pay, companies will still need to retain the service of these individuals. you still need people to clean the building right, unless the management is willing to clean the building themselves.
those holding essential jobs will still be employed, e.g. technician, repairman, security guards.etc. their services are still required no matter the state of the economy.
also, those holding non-essential jobs will be laid off, i agree, but this only help to boost productivity, doing away with unproductive jobs, channeling labour into more productive industries.
When u gauge wages by means of performances, skills, and meritocracy such as education and contribution, you cannot put in a mini wage to control over it, and setting mini wage is a very sensitive issue, you set too high, business got away and we go jobless, you set too low, peoples cannot afford the cost of living and bosses will be more than happy to pay the low wages. Let wages be flexible and reasonable to the economy fluatuation and condition. In this way, you get a better balance to justify wagesIf MacDonald's set a low wage for their staff, and Burger set a higher one, many good ones will go over to burger and that will increase burger sale in term of good customer services, so MacDonald's will need to up their wages to lure back staff, and in this way, the staff gain from wage competition among competitor, now if mini wage is set, both can join hand and give that mini wage set.
So, what is the problem here that we need mini wage, do we have young true beggars or people living in rubbish dump or that our economy is very low as compare to others?? The meaning here is why need to mess up the wage system here, whereby so far, it had served us well and beyong
-
Originally posted by charlize:
They will tell you that life will kick you in the balls.
And that you should get out of their elite uncaring faces.
:)
-
Originally posted by angel7030:
When u gauge wages by means of performances, skills, and meritocracy such as education and contribution, you cannot put in a mini wage to control over it, and setting mini wage is a very sensitive issue, you set too high, business got away and we go jobless, you set too low, peoples cannot afford the cost of living and bosses will be more than happy to pay the low wages. Let wages be flexible and reasonable to the economy fluatuation and condition. In this way, you get a better balance to justify wagesIf MacDonald's set a low wage for their staff, and Burger set a higher one, many good ones will go over to burger and that will increase burger sale in term of good customer services, so MacDonald's will need to up their wages to lure back staff, and in this way, the staff gain from wage competition among competitor, now if mini wage is set, both can join hand and give that mini wage set.
So, what is the problem here that we need mini wage, do we have young true beggars or people living in rubbish dump or that our economy is very low as compare to others?? The meaning here is why need to mess up the wage system here, whereby so far, it had served us well and beyong
definitely not true. those industries which are currently underpaid, are industries that involves little or no singaporeans at all. e.g. basic manufacturing. these are industries that should go.
the more high end manufacturing are alr paying over $5/hr , so they are good to stay. there is significant singaporean presence. e.g. biotech manufacturing. avionics. etc
then, for service job, most are offering above $5/hr too. cashier, salesman, cust service etc.
but what we are concern with are people with essential jobs which can't be replaced, and deserve a standard $5/hr pay which the company obvious can well afford.
e.g. cleaners, mcdonalds staff, etc. Mcdonalds obviously won't move out of spore even if we set a minimum wage, esp when they are open in business in all continents, and in many countries which has a minimum wage law. and as for their profit margins, i shall not mention the obvious. they can surely afford to pay their staff a higher wage than the miserable $3.50/hr.
cleaners, like i mentioned earlier, are also indispensable for any companies, so they die die must hire them at no matter what wage. I dun see why companies are going to close down/ move away if cleaners are to be paid 200-300 more.
-
Very interesting article.
Good for reading.
-
Originally posted by deathmaster:
definitely not true. those industries which are currently underpaid, are industries that involves little or no singaporeans at all. e.g. basic manufacturing. these are industries that should go.
the more high end manufacturing are alr paying over $5/hr , so they are good to stay. there is significant singaporean presence. e.g. biotech manufacturing. avionics. etc
then, for service job, most are offering above $5/hr too. cashier, salesman, cust service etc.
but what we are concern with are people with essential jobs which can't be replaced, and deserve a standard $5/hr pay which the company obvious can well afford.
e.g. cleaners, mcdonalds staff, etc. Mcdonalds obviously won't move out of spore even if we set a minimum wage, esp when they are open in business in all continents, and in many countries which has a minimum wage law. and as for their profit margins, i shall not mention the obvious. they can surely afford to pay their staff a higher wage than the miserable $3.50/hr.
cleaners, like i mentioned earlier, are also indispensable for any companies, so they die die must hire them at no matter what wage. I dun see why companies are going to close down/ move away if cleaners are to be paid 200-300 more.
As i said before, for wages, it is better to paid a person by his abiliites, mini wage serve no much purpose and in fact may cripple the wages below the normal in both a short and long term period, it may work well when economy is bad, cos companies not profiting also need to employ people at the mini wage, which will ultimately increase their Cost of labour and in long run, may need to stop operation or move out, on the other hand, when economy are good, mini wage will work toward a disadvantage point for labourer, cos companies will just maintain mini wage as per set by laws. This makes our wages much less flexible, and even if a mini wage is set high, companies can also play with the variable wages such as bonuses and profit sharing scheme to offset it.We had see and read in news about labour struggle, protest, riot and strike in other countries having mini wage laws, because whenever the economy goes up, they strike to get the mini wage up, and their govts who depend on them for votes may raise the mini wage, and then, when economy goes down, companies unable to sustain Labour Cost, cease operation or move out, leaving many peoples in jobless status resulting in high percentage of jobless.
-
Originally posted by charlize:
Very interesting article.
Good for reading.
Question is.
Was the policy good?
unhappiness + those who are happier = net happiness
There is no such thing call total happiness.
Don't believe in it.
-
Originally posted by βÎτά:
Question is.
Was the policy good?
unhappiness + those who are happier = net happiness
There is no such thing call total happiness.
Don't believe in it.
we are not talking about total happiness, but rather Double happiness, you can get those Chinese Double happiness logo at Chinatown..
-
Originally posted by deathmaster:
definitely not true. those industries which are currently underpaid, are industries that involves little or no singaporeans at all. e.g. basic manufacturing. these are industries that should go.
the more high end manufacturing are alr paying over $5/hr , so they are good to stay. there is significant singaporean presence. e.g. biotech manufacturing. avionics. etc
then, for service job, most are offering above $5/hr too. cashier, salesman, cust service etc.
but what we are concern with are people with essential jobs which can't be replaced, and deserve a standard $5/hr pay which the company obvious can well afford.
e.g. cleaners, mcdonalds staff, etc. Mcdonalds obviously won't move out of spore even if we set a minimum wage, esp when they are open in business in all continents, and in many countries which has a minimum wage law. and as for their profit margins, i shall not mention the obvious. they can surely afford to pay their staff a higher wage than the miserable $3.50/hr.
cleaners, like i mentioned earlier, are also indispensable for any companies, so they die die must hire them at no matter what wage. I dun see why companies are going to close down/ move away if cleaners are to be paid 200-300 more.
So, u mean implement minimum wage, govt no need workfare and so GST will be reduced from 7% to 5% as the govt has said that the increase in GST from 5% to 7% is used to finance the workfare ?
Wa, if this really happens, many people will support the introduction of the minimum wage leh.
Oh, is it one of the reasons why the govt does not want to implement the minimum wage otherwise once the minium wage is implemented, the GST will have to be reduced from 7% to 5% and the govt's tax revenue will decrease a lot ?
-
Originally posted by deathmaster:
here are the details:
http://www.mm2h.gov.my/index.php
under the Malaysia My 2nd Home Scheme, you will be granted a 10yr social visit pass, for unlimited stay in Malaysia, renewable upon expiry.
Upon Approval : Aged Below 50 years old
Open a fixed deposit account of RM300,000.00.
* After a period of one year, the participant can withdraw up to RM150,000.00 for approved expenses relating to house purchase, education for children in Malaysia and medical purposes.
_
House Purchase:
Please be informed that property purchase is not a pre-requisite for participating in MM2H programme.
Any foreigner may purchase any number of residential property in Malaysia, subject to the minimum rates established for foreigners by the different states. They start from RM500,000 per unit for most states, from 1st January 2010. Land is a state matter and it is important to check state laws before making any commitment, as the minimum purchase price is not standardised between states.Car Purchase:
Each participant is allowed to bring in his/her own personal car OR to purchase a locally-assembled car without the need to pay import duty, excise duty and sales tax.
____________________________________________________
in other words, you need to show proof that you have $208k in your bank (for 3 months) , and an income of $4168/month.
after you get approval to participate in the scheme, you have to open a fixed deposit account of $125k in Malaysia. From the fixed account, from the 2nd year onwards, you can withdraw half the amount for purposes such as home purchase, medical fees, and education etc.
it is not a pre-requisite to own a house in M'sia prior to application for the scheme. but they have raised the minimum property value for foreigners from RM250k (SGD$124k) to RM500k as for Jan 2010.
and under the scheme, you will be eligible to drive a M'sian car, e.g. proton, perodua, at M'sian prices, with no COE and the 200% import duty for singapore cars. But the downside is that you will not be allowed to drive your m'sian car into singapore, since singapore citizens and PRs are not allowed to drive M'sian cars within singapore.
i think you can get around the savings requirements:
ask your relatives to loan you money to place in your account for 3 months, to meet the RM500k requirement.
afterwards, get a loan for RM300k, for the fixed deposit, deposit into M'sian banks like Maybank, which has some presence in singapore.
after 1 yr, draw out RM150k to pay for M'sian house, and apply for bank loan if necessary.
there you go, the first step to owning your own bungalow.
but the main hurdle is:
1) meeting the income requirement of S$4.2k/month.
2) Save a considerable amount of money. e.g. S$125k? or at least enough to service your loan interest.
RM500k (S$208k) for a bungalow is still cheaper than a S$350k HDB 4 room flat.
Thanks four infor.It do look tempting to buy one in JB.
-
Haiz........
Why do people always think more revenue for government is good? It's good only when the money is spent on the people, not when it's saved up in their coffers to pay for their multi-million dollar salaries.
-
Haiz,//....i beg yr pardon, not all people think otherwise, first and foremost, there are class divide for people in singapore, the top half agreed to give more revenue to the govt, in return govt, provide them a peace and safe place to do business, play and have family. For the lower half, they are more or less got no where to go, so have to ride along with the top half and pay revenue. In political science, you do not need to satisfy the middle and lower class peoples, just delight the upper class will do, cos most of these upper class peoples are bosses of the lower class. You see the real example in India, pakistan, malaysia, thailand, philippine and so on. In fact, almost or nearly all countries practice the same.
-
dun be cockernarden la.....u comparing us with countries one or two rungs below in terms of development status.
-
Why HDB prices are like bungalows prices in Australia ? Since housing is a necessity why so expensive? I just dun understand.....people get married, apply for HDB then get themselves into debts for the next 30 years? How to live a happy life like this? Will our children be able to buy their own house next time??