View Full Version : CM7 should be revised, my sincere advice to government
Although my the other thread suggests that CM7 may likely result in a fall in price due to the dramatic decrease of demand (larger than the drop in supply, http://forums.condosingapore.com/showthread.php?t=16552 ), the government can actually be more effective by announcing a more explicit target, or, at least not as ambiguous as previous wordings like "things turn around". I thought government should have learnt from Fed and ECB that, things can be more effective once you conquer the expectations, by setting a target (like Fed's unemployment rate target) or showing your stern position (like ECB's OMT, which actually lowers the peripheral yields by just announcing it without actually implementing it); for example, government can set a price fall target of 15% within 2 years, and promise to implement more measure until this is achieved. This will temper the market expectation and make CM7 more effective.
And while doing so, always keep the current good treatment of first-timers , and do not deprive Singaporeans the rights to invest if they have ample cash, do not squeeze out more tax while implementing the CMs. Add the remission of ABSD if Singaporeans purchases with a LTV of less than 50% or 40% or similar, for those true investors, they did nothing wrong to deserve the 7% or 10% ABSD. With this remission of ABSD, you would also add a little liquidity to the market while keeping CM7 effective.
Call it a CM7 revision, and act swiftly!
wah bro.. no government wants to be seen as anti-growth.. i think this suggestion is too extreme. They have 'reputation' to uphold to u know.. ;)
this cooling measure that they have is good enough lah :)
As the DBS chairman said, his feel is that garment is prepared to trade off some growth.
My advise to garment is therefore, if you want to do it, do it like a man, do it like Ben, set a target, and all the arguments here will stop. Don't make announcement with vague words leaving the market guessing, and don't implement a CM using the ridiculous ABSD to add to the tax burden of your own people.
for example, government can set a price fall target of 15% within 2 years, and promise to implement more measure until this is achieved.
haha, if really announce like this, price straight away correct 15%...
it will be so effective, until the sg prop is at ice temperature forever :D
and please dun say, drop liao, later remove the cm again... who will have confidence in the policy maker again?
As the DBS chairman said, his feel is that garment is prepared to trade off some growth.
My advise to garment is therefore, if you want to do it, do it like a man, do it like Ben, set a target, and all the arguments here will stop. Don't make announcement with vague words leaving the market guessing, and don't implement a CM using the ridiculous ABSD to add to the tax burden of your own people.
You really don't get it :doh:
Why you think people are investing at the first place?
Ben can talk and give u money out of his a**
Govt need resources time people land and infrastructure to build house.
How govt can cool the market without Absd? If too many foreigners or even Singaporean keep investing Singapore will run out of land and infrastructure.
As the DBS chairman said, his feel is that garment is prepared to trade off some growth.
My advise to garment is therefore, if you want to do it, do it like a man, do it like Ben, set a target, and all the arguments here will stop. Don't make announcement with vague words leaving the market guessing, and don't implement a CM using the ridiculous ABSD to add to the tax burden of your own people.
Seriously, if you are from the gahment, what target would you set? 5% 10% 15% drop? What is considered a healthy correction that works best in the interest of the population and which will meet strategic agenda such as laying the grounds for upcoming announcements (eg population white paper). No easy answer, bro economist. Current policy formulation leaves wriggle room for adjustment later and yet sends a strong enough signal to the market.
On the absd, I fully agree with your comments.
wondering if someone working for KBW is watching...
What do you think the developers would do if they explicit stated a targeted fall of 15% in home prices. Must consider things from multiple angles young man.
Gahment wants to tame it, not kill it. Target -15% is disastrous
Cm7 is good for commercial. Ask the buyers today at Alexandra park hotel
Do that, and no more developers want to come SG. They want sustainability for long term gain of all, not crash the market and all lose except benefit a small group.
Cm7 is good for commercial. Ask the buyers today at Alexandra park hotel
huat ah..... that 1
LOL... You certainly have no idea what's the rational behind CMs...
Property is never meant for investment
Think about it !!!
Using unfounded judgmental words doesn't help.
LOL... You certainly have no idea what's the rational behind CMs...
Property is never meant for investment
Think about it !!!
Why your advocated policy so extreme anti-foreigners (foreigners include PRs Ok). Such policies will only drive rich foreigners, make them move out, close their factories and businesses here and results in surge in unemployment. Policies targeting problems of economy are not so simple as what you advocated. Are you sure you are "economist"? You don't know that long-run rate of acceptable inflation is 3% and usually property prices will increase slightly more than that (without monetary stimulus)? With monetary stimulus, property prices is expected to increase much more than inflation.
And Where on earth would any govt actually want property prices to crash 15% and create deflation? :doh: By the way, Japan still can't climb out of deflation. As such, govts all over the world are more scare of deflation than inflation. :cheers1:
I think that is enough from me, a non-economist..... :p
Although my the other thread suggests that CM7 may likely result in a fall in price due to the dramatic decrease of demand (larger than the drop in supply, http://forums.condosingapore.com/showthread.php?t=16552 ), the government can actually be more effective by announcing a more explicit target, or, at least not as ambiguous as previous wordings like "things turn around". I thought government should have learnt from Fed and ECB that, things can be more effective once you conquer the expectations, by setting a target (like Fed's unemployment rate target) or showing your stern position (like ECB's OMT, which actually lowers the peripheral yields by just announcing it without actually implementing it); for example, government can set a price fall target of 15% within 2 years, and promise to implement more measure until this is achieved. This will temper the market expectation and make CM7 more effective.
And while doing so, always keep the current good treatment of first-timers , and do not deprive Singaporeans the rights to invest if they have ample cash, do not squeeze out more tax while implementing the CMs. Add the remission of ABSD if Singaporeans purchases with a LTV of less than 50% or 40% or similar, for those true investors, they did nothing wrong to deserve the 7% or 10% ABSD. With this remission of ABSD, you would also add a little liquidity to the market while keeping CM7 effective.
Call it a CM7 revision, and act swiftly!
I'm not anti-foreigners, our ancestors all come from foreign countries, right? I'm merely suggesting a more effective revision IF the government is really sincere of "turn around", and I really personally don't like the vague wordings as well as the fact that ABSD is applied universally to additional properties instead of simply adjusting LTVs higher (govt is trying to tax the way out). Harsher tax can be applied to foreigners, PRs, but should be temporary, as Singapore still needs foreigners to thrive, and our properties need them even more.
Anyway, further discussions here don't make much more sense now as we are not garment.
Why your advocated policy so extreme anti-foreigners (foreigners include PRs Ok). Such policies will only drive rich foreigners, make them move out, close their factories and businesses here and results in surge in unemployment. Policies targeting problems of economy are not so simple as what you advocated. Are you sure you are "economist"? You don't know that long-run rate of acceptable inflation is 3% and usually property prices will increase slightly more than that (without monetary stimulus)? With monetary stimulus, property prices is expected to increase much more than inflation.
And Where on earth would any govt actually want property prices to crash 15% and create deflation? :doh: By the way, Japan still can't climb out of deflation. As such, govts all over the world are more scare of deflation than inflation. :cheers1:
I think that is enough from me, a non-economist..... :p
Why your advocated policy so extreme anti-foreigners (foreigners include PRs Ok). Such policies will only drive rich foreigners, make them move out, close their factories and businesses here and results in surge in unemployment. Policies targeting problems of economy are not so simple as what you advocated. Are you sure you are "economist"? You don't know that long-run rate of acceptable inflation is 3% and usually property prices will increase slightly more than that (without monetary stimulus)? With monetary stimulus, property prices is expected to increase much more than inflation.
And Where on earth would any govt actually want property prices to crash 15% and create deflation? :doh: By the way, Japan still can't climb out of deflation. As such, govts all over the world are more scare of deflation than inflation. :cheers1:
I think that is enough from me, a non-economist..... :p
Japan is a victim of currency war against USA in which they lose badly.. You think Japan don't know how to use QE? You think Japan don't know a strong yen is affecting their economy? A weak yen is to their advantage as they hold trillions dollars worth of US Bond. With a strong yen, do you know how much Japan lost.
Same thing why China is depressing CNY. It is just to the advantage of China to do it as they hold 1.7 trillion USD. But I feel with the 2008 Crisis. USA is slowly losing this war against China and Japan. Even Germany is joining the war when it declare that it is going to withdraw tons of gold from USA and Europe. Let see how US continue with this..
Why your advocated policy so extreme anti-foreigners (foreigners include PRs Ok). Such policies will only drive rich foreigners, make them move out, close their factories and businesses here and results in surge in unemployment. Policies targeting problems of economy are not so simple as what you advocated. Are you sure you are "economist"? You don't know that long-run rate of acceptable inflation is 3% and usually property prices will increase slightly more than that (without monetary stimulus)? With monetary stimulus, property prices is expected to increase much more than inflation.
And Where on earth would any govt actually want property prices to crash 15% and create deflation? :doh: By the way, Japan still can't climb out of deflation. As such, govts all over the world are more scare of deflation than inflation. :cheers1:
I think that is enough from me, a non-economist..... :p
This is the same mentality as someone we know.
As long as property price drops and they get to buy cheap, it doesnt matter if the side effects are people pulling out of Singapore, leaving behind Singaporeans and their dream condos at cheap prices.
We must understand that Singapore has no natural resources. Have you wondered why for each Singaporean employee companies can employ a dozen in India/China/Philippines ?
Think, my friends, Think!
Making calls to crash the property market is in NOBODY's interest. This is exactly the same as the "dont build the old folks home next to my block" complain, except that this time, the one complaining is an old folk himself - see how silly ?
DKSG
LOL... You certainly have no idea what's the rational behind CMs...
Property is never meant for investment
Think about it !!!Ask Robert Kiyosaki and Robbie Fowler. :cheers1:
Ask Robert Kiyosaki and Robbie Fowler. :cheers1:
This is the same as saying - Stamps are only meant for sending letters, Gold is only meant to be made into pendant, bracelets, whatever to be worn... and the list goes on and on ...
DKSG
I think there is a misunderstanding of the words Cooling Measures.
It is meant to cool the market, not CRASH the market.
If government says it is a CRASHING MEASURE, then I admit we should bring back all the taxes and scare the hell out of all classes of investors.
The aim of the current CM is the COOL the market and moderate prices increases to be in line with fundamentals.
DKSG
I think there is a misunderstanding of the words Cooling Measures.
It is meant to cool the market, not CRASH the market.
If government says it is a CRASHING MEASURE, then I admit we should bring back all the taxes and scare the hell out of all classes of investors.
The aim of the current CM is the COOL the market and moderate prices increases to be in line with fundamentals.
DKSG
want to crash market - easy: 50% tax on capital gains
I'm not sure why a lot of bros here have a mis-construed understanding of TS's posts.
He said to make CM7 more effective with a target in mind as well as changes to the Absd, so as to not punish those who can afford unnecessarily, since at the end of the day, it is the bank and economy that the govt wants to protect.
I don't believe he mentioned anything about wanting to crash the market?
Although my the other thread suggests that CM7 may likely result in a fall in price due to the dramatic decrease of demand (larger than the drop in supply, http://forums.condosingapore.com/showthread.php?t=16552 ), the government can actually be more effective by announcing a more explicit target, or, at least not as ambiguous as previous wordings like "things turn around". I thought government should have learnt from Fed and ECB that, things can be more effective once you conquer the expectations, by setting a target (like Fed's unemployment rate target) or showing your stern position (like ECB's OMT, which actually lowers the peripheral yields by just announcing it without actually implementing it); for example, government can set a price fall target of 15% within 2 years, and promise to implement more measure until this is achieved. This will temper the market expectation and make CM7 more effective.
....
Call it a CM7 revision, and act swiftly!
This was his example, a target of -15% wor.
Although my the other thread suggests that CM7 may likely result in a fall in price due to the dramatic decrease of demand (larger than the drop in supply, http://forums.condosingapore.com/showthread.php?t=16552 ), the government can actually be more effective by announcing a more explicit target, or, at least not as ambiguous as previous wordings like "things turn around". I thought government should have learnt from Fed and ECB that, things can be more effective once you conquer the expectations, by setting a target (like Fed's unemployment rate target) or showing your stern position (like ECB's OMT, which actually lowers the peripheral yields by just announcing it without actually implementing it); for example, government can set a price fall target of 15% within 2 years, and promise to implement more measure until this is achieved. This will temper the market expectation and make CM7 more effective.
And while doing so, always keep the current good treatment of first-timers , and do not deprive Singaporeans the rights to invest if they have ample cash, do not squeeze out more tax while implementing the CMs. Add the remission of ABSD if Singaporeans purchases with a LTV of less than 50% or 40% or similar, for those true investors, they did nothing wrong to deserve the 7% or 10% ABSD. With this remission of ABSD, you would also add a little liquidity to the market while keeping CM7 effective.
Call it a CM7 revision, and act swiftly!
Why must revise? Becoz some people miss the boat to invest? How can u give 1st timmer chance n still let people invest? Where $ come from? To be meaningful to let the investment eco system work u need outside funds. How can ot be made a singaporean only landscape. Shit happens we all die cxxk standing.
I feel the current cm is harsh but its fair for the current situation. Give those who need a roof a chance.
This was his example, a target of -15% wor.
15% is crash meh? I'm thinking more of > 30% then considered bad downturn.
But I could be wrong of course. What's the amount of correction that gurus here are comfortable with?
15% is crash meh? I'm thinking more of > 30% then considered bad downturn.
But I could be wrong of course. What's the amount of correction that gurus here are comfortable with?
by garmen stnds, 40% down, that's why LTV 60%
That's simple, the reactions are very negative here, because my example of -15% meant a crash for them, while in a more balanced view, -15% is a correction, not a crash.
I didn't think CM7 was to ensure price continue moderate increase with fundamentals. I remember the ministers said the price increase has already exceeded fundamentals, and they want to see a "turn around".
That's simple, the reactions are very negative here, because my example of -15% meant a crash for them, while in a more balanced view, -15% is a correction, not a crash.
I didn't think CM7 was to ensure price continue moderate increase with fundamentals. I remember the ministers said the price increase has already exceeded fundamentals, and they want to see a "turn around".
Using the stock market as a guide, anything -20% is just a correction. Investing in property is higher risk than stock as you are leverage many times. ie down 100k, borrow 400k. If you like salted fish, you must be able to tahan thirst :D
Using the stock market as a guide, anything -20% is just a correction. Investing in property is higher risk than stock as you are leverage many times. ie down 100k, borrow 400k. If you like salted fish, you must be able to tahan thirst :D
Wah! Like your salted fish analogy! Haha :)
That's simple, the reactions are very negative here, because my example of -15% meant a crash for them, while in a more balanced view, -15% is a correction, not a crash.
I didn't think CM7 was to ensure price continue moderate increase with fundamentals. I remember the ministers said the price increase has already exceeded fundamentals, and they want to see a "turn around".
have you not see D'leedon "crashed" by 15% ? It has met the intended objective.
Developers are the one setting the price not owners...
wondering if someone working for KBW is watching...
this place hurts so much. iskandar door opens for you.
surrender ic la.
stock market 20% down is a crash right?
here's a simple illustration, assuming 40% downpayment.
15% correction is 15/40 = 37.5% correction to your equity.
nowadays people sibey heong. 37.5% equity kenna wipe out also very cool. i respect!
as i recall, when stock prices dropped by 35% back in 2008, everyone already cry father cry mother.
stock market 20% down is a crash right?
here's a simple illustration, assuming 40% downpayment.
15% correction is 15/40 = 37.5% correction to your equity.
nowadays people sibey heong. 37.5% equity kenna wipe out also very cool. i respect!
as i recall, when stock prices dropped by 35% back in 2008, everyone already cry father cry mother.
stock mkt 35% down, your $$ may never be seen again.
ppty mkt 35% down, one day your $$ will be seen again.
stock market 20% down is a crash right?
here's a simple illustration, assuming 40% downpayment.
15% correction is 15/40 = 37.5% correction to your equity.
nowadays people sibey heong. 37.5% equity kenna wipe out also very cool. i respect!
as i recall, when stock prices dropped by 35% back in 2008, everyone already cry father cry mother.
calculation is off. 15% correction is on developer's asking price, there is no hit for new buyers. only impact is ABSD
the question then comes at what price did the developer peg the units to?
just a simple mathematical exercise, the development was launched at about $1500psf, peaking at about $1750psf
if i'm a shrewd developer, i just peg my prices at $1750 and give 15% discount - viola! i sell now at $1486psf, close to my launch price.
stock mkt 35% down, your $$ may never be seen again.
ppty mkt 35% down, one day your $$ will be seen again.
those people down 35% on singapore blue chip shares were crying foul. penny stocks you may not see again, but blue chip shares have just as good a chance as property to come back.
those people down 35% on singapore blue chip shares were crying foul. penny stocks you may not see again, but blue chip shares have just as good a chance as property to come back.
worst are s-chips. accounting fraud, don't pay dividends, refusal to heed SGX's warning, etc etc
S chips aren't even worth mentioning with their kind of track record.
those people down 35% on singapore blue chip shares were crying foul. penny stocks you may not see again, but blue chip shares have just as good a chance as property to come back.
This I agree.
I mentioned before. My parents have been living happily on their SG bank shares since retirement more than 30 years ago. 2 main counters - OCBC and UOB. Despite all the major financial upheavals in the past 3 decades, they are still overall a lot up and esp if you count in the dividends.
People forget to count in the dividends when they look at their portfolio.
My parents have also been reinvesting the dividends from OCBC in the past few years when there is a dip in the market.
SG govt does a lot to protect the SG banks. Including the latest CMs.
those people down 35% on singapore blue chip shares were crying foul. penny stocks you may not see again, but blue chip shares have just as good a chance as property to come back.
yah that's true. if not afraid of overconcentration of risk, just keep buying bank shares and maybe the NCPS... dollar cost average, sure will not lose..
i had another fren holding F&N since mid 1990s. from top to bottom and back to top. now you know what happened. and not counting the good div in between.
NCPS is useful for those with lower risk appetite and parking $$$ to wait for opportunities.
My father had a miscommunication with his broker a few years ago. Wanted to buy 2 lots (2000) of F&N to round up his holding. Broker misheard and bought 20 lots instead. That was a lucky mistake.
This year another miscommunication. He wanted to buy 2 lots of F&N to round up his holding again. Broker bought 2 (two) shares.
:banghead: :banghead: :banghead:
NCPS is useful for those with lower risk appetite and parking $$$ to wait for opportunities.
My father had a miscommunication with his broker a few years ago. Wanted to buy 2 lots (2000) of F&N to round up his holding. Broker misheard and bought 20 lots instead. That was a lucky mistake.
This year another miscommunication. He wanted to buy 2 lots of F&N to round up his holding again. Broker bought 2 (two) shares.
:banghead: :banghead: :banghead:
what could be worse? when you speak chinese, 买 and 卖 is just one "tone" away. that's what happened to my dad. after that i told him better use english, not chinese or cantonese.
worse still, my dad speak cantonese with broker. between cantonese and chinese, the same tone means different thing. :banghead: :banghead: :banghead:
NCPS is useful for those with lower risk appetite and parking $$$ to wait for opportunities.
My father had a miscommunication with his broker a few years ago. Wanted to buy 2 lots (2000) of F&N to round up his holding. Broker misheard and bought 20 lots instead. That was a lucky mistake.
This year another miscommunication. He wanted to buy 2 lots of F&N to round up his holding again. Broker bought 2 (two) shares.
:banghead: :banghead: :banghead:
Lucky the mistake a few years ago more than make up for this year's mistake.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.2 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.