http://theonlinecitizen.com/2011/11/...operty-market/
Lots of fallacious reasoning and false assumptions. I leave it up to you to think through....any comments?
http://theonlinecitizen.com/2011/11/...operty-market/
Lots of fallacious reasoning and false assumptions. I leave it up to you to think through....any comments?
i would disagree. 200-300k brand new flats are still attainable dreams with some hard work.
but some of the new generation of youngsters expect that private condos should remain within their reach whilst they take a few holidays a year.
The usual government-bashing articles... take with a fist of salt.
yeah, why should anyone feel they are held ransom, there are options. For the lower income families I agree they could use more subsidies. but those families with couples of combined income of $5000 or more, they really have to look at their spending habits. the world is not going to slow down for anyone, whether they like it or not.Originally Posted by howgozit
Actually the articles did not say anything really wrong... I thought the writer has a point...
land prices may drive rentals higher but that's provided there's demand at higher rentals, otherwise, the landlords are merely speculating on capital appreciation, and without rentals driving higher, they'll eventually fall back to earth.
If government price bto at low prices and hawker centers rental at cheap prices, sure will be able check the increase in prices.... Theproblem is the government. Also want to make money ineveyrhting...
actually i don't think hawker rentals are very high, it's probably those privatised ones that are high...Originally Posted by CCR
as for BTOs, i'm not sure why people think they are very high. If they went punggol or sengkang or buangkok, it's not that bad right? Die die must be near town? if they say DBSS, then I'm inclined to agree.
Wrt to hawker centre rentals.... can't entirely blame the government lah.. it is the greed of the hawker stall owners. Many hawker stall owners sublet their stalls to other hawkers instead of running the stalls themselves often at ridiculously inflated prices (esp in popular hawker centres). Hawkers in turn pass on the cost to their customers.Originally Posted by CCR
This rampant in Singapore
If the govt don't earn, how to have money to pay enough to get good people to work in the civil service, how to have money to build good train, road, water, and air infrastructure and yet maintain current low income tax and corporate tax regime? The money must come from somewhere right?
Originally Posted by CCR
Yes that's how wealth gets redistributed. The key is how to narrow the income gap rather than stop the wealthier from getting wealthier while waiting lower income to catch up. Economically not viable. LKY also mentioned it in his book "Hard Truths" which most people don't like to hear : the government will never stop someone from becoming richer.Originally Posted by teddybear
LKY is correct. Why should he if one is capable within the establised framework in Singapore. That' s the key to meritocracy. This is what motivates one to perform. To do otherwise will discourage the truely talented to stay in Singapore.Originally Posted by Eastboy
知 足 常 乐
most articles from that website are usually written by complainers and most probably losers too. so i would just ignore them : ) i dont want to become themOriginally Posted by Eastboy
Singapore is the best place to own a property/ies!!
you dunno meh? to cover for the lowering of corporate tax and top income tax, they raised GST lar hahaOriginally Posted by teddybear
We need to compare Sg to other countries in Asia in order to draw a fair conclusion.
No matter how, I still grade Sg is one of the best...especially when u compare to HK, TPE, and Shanghai etc in term of jobs, growth, place to stay, and air
I thought the article seems ok. By most accounts, the overall quality of life in SG for middle income & below, has certainly deteriorated over the last 5 years.
This is mostly due to the foreign "talent" policy. I think The Online Citizen is the most balanced site, among the online websites these days.
The headline readsOriginally Posted by yaozong7
"An entire nation held hostage by the property market"
The author is trying to sensationalise the issue. He is implying that it is a government "conspiracy" to entrap the nation by allowing the property to rise, below is an excerpt from the article
"Singapore is one of the few countries, if not the only country in the world whose government explicitly states that property does not simply provide shelter, but is also an investment, a nest egg, a retirement plan, and an asset that is meant to grow appreciably in value over time.
Is that really logical? A rising stock market is a sign of growing corporate profits, and increasing gross national product. But what forms the foundation of a rising property market? Why should, and how can, a government mandate that property values must always be on the rise, and furthermore, always increase at a respectably fast pace?"
Like I mentioned earlier, I would read TOC and TR with a large dose of salt and use my own judgement. The authors there like to intertwine facts with suppositions for the purpose of government bashing.
Gahmen is ultra-commercial ...just look at say JTC selling of the industrial tranches to Soilbuild and Mapletree Industrial. Now the buyers are raising the rentals to market rate in the next rental cycle.
Nothing wrong - just will add to cost and thus inflation.
Timing also abit off...
Originally Posted by CCR
i find more salt in the states times and mediacorpse news .. doctor say dont consume too much.Originally Posted by howgozit
Yep... that's true too... we have to be careful about what we read.Originally Posted by august
Yes, too much money is in real estate now, not just residential. Flip through the papers and you see ads of built-up industrial sites "available for rent" from Govt linked property companies.Originally Posted by gn108
With Reits pushing up commercial rent like no tomorrow (up to $40-$55 psf depending on size), is it any wonder that our food and other cost are rising rapidly, with no contribution to the "real" economy? Haiz.
In land-scarce Singapore, it is inevitable. Unless we turn communist, no ruling party can ever prevent the property prices to escalate.Originally Posted by yaozong7
This is the cost of doing business in Singapore. Unfortunately, we are the victims of our own success.
If Indonesia get their act together and Malaysia really "Boleh", Singapore will be in deep Sh-t and people will instead be complaining about property prices falling.
hmm howgozit bro ur thinking very similar to mine
TOC standard type of pap bashing article lah. u want more sensational one ? Go TR and read how Temasek pays its employees tens of millions each
... fed's helicopter ben is trying to find all ways to get his property market to kidnap his nation....
... the entire planet now is being held hostage by greece/italy....
hmm.... as for sgp: "An entire nation held hostage by the property market"... => let me worry about that later....
Ya, I do think that spending habit is so much depending on which area they are willing to spend. Some prefer to spend on travelling, some on branded goods, some prefer to go to restaurant to enjoy good food, some on cars, some on stock, some prefer to put their money in the bank while some don't mind to buy expensive ppty. This is my .Originally Posted by kane
But their life are still certainly better than those in other countries like Malaysia. Isn't it?
Originally Posted by yaozong7
Actually, they expect more than that: They want govt to make private condos very cheap for them to buy and after they had bought, to make it so expensive so that they can cash out at enormous profit!
And they didn't see the govt doing that, they say "I sure vote opposition!"
Originally Posted by kane
Singaporeans' incomes are certainly higher but I am not so sure our lives are better. In any case, why compare to the Malaysians? As a "First World" country, we should be comparing ourselves to the Aussies, the Swiss etc.Originally Posted by teddybear
In Australia for instance, the rental cost is comparatively lower while the average wages are much higher than Singapore's. This makes for a higher standard of living in general. FD int rates are higher than inflation rate as well. You may say that the Aussies pay higher taxes, but in return, their healthcare is covered while cars and housing are much cheaper.
That said, Singapore still remains a better place for upper middle incomes to earn their money. But for middle income & below, life is a tough struggle, & the Govt has been late to acknowledge that.