Newbie
Can't imagine how lively condominiums will be if very short term rental is allowed and people start drinking liquor by the pool past 2230 as per Iswaran. Ban liquor in public places and push them to private areas managed by incompetent managing agents. Then need to employ guards and increase the maintenance funds to cover repairs and cost of hiring security and cleaner staff... It is all planned.
ipropertyguru
Submitted my survey. a BIG NO to short-term stays!
Newbie
It is not about right or wrong. Both side can produce "make sense argument". It is about Voting (if government really follow the voting/survey result).
Ultimate Underdog
http://www.straitstimes.com/news/sin...nb-poll-201502
More people are already in favour? They should start a poll in this forum.
The three laws of Kelonguni:
Where there is kelong, there is guni.
No kelong no guni.
More kelong = more guni.
Junior
That is airbnb's own poll, lol.Originally Posted by Kelonguni
If the govt allows short term stays, it will be a strong reason for me not to vote for the ruling party.
Senior
Good move by airbnb!
Global recession is coming....
airbnb's own poll is a joke!
This should poll this forum here, a property forum make up of property owners! Don't know who they polled that gets the type of results entirely in their favour?
Newbie
Do the poll hereairbnb's own poll is a joke!
This should poll this forum here, a property forum make up of property owners! Don't know who they polled that gets the type of results entirely in their favour?
http://forums.condosingapore.com/sho...ort-Term-Stays
Till now still 50/50
Senior
The Decision already make, the poll is just to let people happy they have a say.
Do you want to stay in a village or move to the city.
Ultimate Underdog
I think people still prefer kampung.
The three laws of Kelonguni:
Where there is kelong, there is guni.
No kelong no guni.
More kelong = more guni.
Newbie
Well, landlords will volunteer to be in the council to ease their renting out of apartments. Retirees will have income or things to do to kill time...
The devil is in the details and the implementation.
Global recession is coming....
If ST rental is allowed, should buy cheap landed terrace, then re-partition to many rooms (12 or more) and rent out cheaply, can do roaring business!
In condos, genuine MC members who really used to volunteer their time to work for free will back out to allow those with vested interests to take-over so that these people can do roaring business with ST rentals!
May be MC members will get to collect FAT ALLOWANCES that is tax-free, just like MPs who collect $15k+ a month tax-free for just a night's job per week and average a day per month in parliament?
Newbie
Honestly I am very subjected when I vote for YES. I see my self in the future as old person and Not sure whether my CPF is enough for me. To play safe it would be good for me if I can make money from my condo when I am too old to do a real job.
Junior
Don't mind me saying but that would be rather short sighted. Being able to monetise your asset does not mean its capital value is being protected. If old age retirement is a concern, you should be lobbying the govt to tweak or relook its policies in that area, and I don't mean a one-off "pioneer" package.
Newbie
Do not worry. Every one have their own share to express their Vote. It is not about right or wrong. It is about what the majority want.
Last edited by Sandiwara; 18-02-15 at 19:32.
Junior
If short term rental is allowed, then it is another case of majority (residents + landlords with long-term views) losing out for the benefits of a very very small minority.
So the case is really really very clear cut if you want to benefit the majority : )
Senior
People doing rental whether short or long term are always in the small minority in comparison to the entire population. This is not a case of majority beating the minority in votes, but how the govt can balance the rights of minority and majority. It is very much like the argument for and against allowing smoking in eateries like coffeeshops, there will always be those for and against.
Newbie
Yes, there will be those supporting and those rejecting the idea. For the next 3 elections at least, Singapore is only ready for short term stay if enforcement is effective and managed by honest Singaporeans. Jobs created should not to be outsourced to foreign imports and to benefit them. The ancillary opportunities must go to supporting true blue Singaporeans.
Global recession is coming....
If Singapore government and MND legislates to allow short-term stay, then they better tell us how they are going to contact-trace the people/tourists/foreigners who come into contact with disease/virus-carriers (like below case)?
As we know, short-term stay do not have proper records of who stay in the unit, and there is no way for MOH to do proper contact-tracing of foreigners/tourists who stayed in short-term stay private properties!
When such thing happens, should we blame MND or MOH? Don't tell me it will become another case of "unsweep pathway" because nobody claim responsibility? (That is why need to set up a new board/body to act as a one-stop hotline? ops, who remember what is that board/body called?)
China Airlines stewardess possibly spreads rubella to over 1,000 passengers
By Chi-hao James Lo
China Post/Asia News Network | Fri, Mar 20 2015
Send a tip
TAIPEI, Taiwan - The Centres for Disease Control yesterday said that a female flight attendant of China Airlines unknowingly contracted rubella, urging the CDC to try and conduct follow-ups with up to 1,558 people.
CDC Deputy Director-General Chuang Jen-hsiang told local news that an unnamed CAL flight attendant from Northern Taiwan developed symptoms of rubella on March 14, such as fever, a runny nose and skin rash.
The individual received a diagnosis on March 18 that confirmed rubella, and is currently confined to quarantine Chuang said.
According to the mandatory health inspection cards people filled out at immigration, Chuang said that the individual was likely infected between Feb. 21 and Feb. 28. The case is currently ruled as a case that was contracted from abroad, with potential areas narrowed down to Vietnam, Indonesia and Hong Kong.
Chuang also said that during the estimated period of the disease's communicability, the flight attendant had served on six international flights.
The first two were on a March 8 roundtrip from Taoyuan to Fukuoka, Japan on flights CI116 and CI117. The second two were between March 10 to 11, on flights CI110 and CI111 which were also a roundtrip from Taoyuan to Fukuoka.
The final two flights were on a roundtrip between March 13 and 14 on flights CI753 and CI754 on a roundtrip from Taoyuan to Singapore.
The deputy director-general said that it has been confirmed that 686 nationals and 872 foreign passengers had been in contact with the flight attendant.
Chuang said that the CDC has successfully contacted 72 out of the 686 local individuals.
As such, the CDC implores that all nationals aboard the listed flights to call the 1922 Disease Prevention Hotline or contact their local health department for observation and care.
As for the other international passengers, Chuang said, the CDC will contact the related health organisations in the 11 countries in accordance with international health regulations.
- See more at: http://travel.asiaone.com/article/ne....XZT0nCeP.dpuf
Junior
ura only allows more than 6 months stay.
That number seems to be arbitary.
what if URA has put minimum of 1 year stay.
Then have consultation about the minimum being changed to 6 months.
I am pretty sure the same arguments would be brought if URA were to change to 6 months.
Yet presently, people are pretty happy with the current regulation of minimum 6 mths stay.
I guess people dont pretty much like change.
people happy with min 6 months.
then change to min 5months, people grumble & accept, not much different between 5 and 6 months.
then change to min 4months, people grumble & accept, not much different between 4 and 5 months.
then change to min 3months, people grumble & accept, not much different between 3 and 4 months.
then change to min 2months, people grumble & accept, not much different between 2 and 3 months.
then change to min 1months, people grumble & accept, not much different between 1 and 2 months.
then change to min 3weeks, people grumble & accept, not much different between 3weeks and 1 month.
then change to min 2weeks, people grumble & accept, not much different between 2 and 3weeks.
then change to min 1week, people grumble & accept, not much different between 1 and 2weeks.
then change to min 3day, people grumble & accept, not much different between 3days and 1week.
then change to min 1day, people grumble & accept, not much different between 1day and 3days.
so whats the problem, people need time to adjust from min 6months to min 1day?
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote