Tag: Singaporeans

MND: Most Wiling To Pay More Than Average Price Of Flats
In a recent survey of nearly 1,500 residents, MND said it showed that majority of prospective flat buyers are willing to pay more than the current average prices.

However, the survey also showed that people continue to view the new BTO flats as expensive. The survey was conducted in November last year.

Last year, the average price of a 4-room HDB flat in a non-mature estate was $295,000. Eighty per cent went for under $350,000.

MND said a third of the respondents did not know how much such flats cost, while 40% overestimated the price. The most common estimate MND said, was between $300,001 and $400,000 for a 4-room unit.

That estimated price range was higher than the average $295,000, MND said.

The survey also found that those who intend to buy a flat in the next 1 to 2 years are willing to pay as much as or more than actual BTO prices in non-mature estates:
- 3-room flats (avg price $186,000 in 2014) – 58% willing to pay more than $200,000
- 4-room flats (avg price $295,000 in 2014) – 61% willing to pay more than $300,000
- 5-room flats (avg price $391,000 in 2014) – 51% willing to pay more than $400,000
However, it’s not known if MND is aware that a person willing to pay more does not necessarily mean he is happy to do so. The 2 matters are not the same.

In any case, the better approach to measure affordability of a flat is to take the ratio of the price of the flat over the annual household income of the owners.

Many BTO HDB flats still remain unaffordable

After Mr Khaw Boon Wan took over the job as National Development Minister from Mah Bow Tan in 2011, Mr Khaw told Parliament that more would be done to reduce BTO flat prices relative to income, so as to reduce the financial burden of housing on the young. He said [Link]:

“Many are now clamoring for the HDB to return to basics and its original mission of helping Singaporeans own a basic home. But what does ‘returning to basics’ mean?

The primary mission of HDB to offer an affordable flat for the majority of Singaporeans will remain unchanged. Fortunately this is within our control as we set BTO prices and HDB is the largest housing developer.

We have stopped BTO prices from rising by delinking them from resale prices. We can now pause and see what else we can do to bring BTO prices in non-mature estates to, say, around 4 years of (annual) salaryas it was before the current property cycle started.

One thing is clear. We are committed to restoring and maintaining the affordability of new HDB flats to the vast majority of first-timer Singaporean households. Their Singapore Dream of owning their own flats, like their parents’, is safe. We will make sure of that.”

Note that Mr Khaw used the term “restoring” the affordability of new HDB BTO flats, which implies that in his predecessor’s time (i.e. Mah Bow Tan), the HDB BTO flats were already unaffordable.

In the 70′s, a graduate’s starting pay was around $1,000 per month. Then, in Marine Parade HDB estate, the price of a new 3-room, 4-room and 5-room flat was $17,000, $20,000 and $35,000 respectively. A young graduate could easily afford a 5-room flat at a Price-to-Annual Income Ratio, also known as the Affordability Ratio (AR), of slightly under 3 (i.e. 3 years of annual income to match the price of the house). Even households earning $500 a month could easily afford a 3-room flat priced at $17,000 (AR under 3).

The World Bank considers a ratio of 5 or under as affordable for local residents, while the United Nations has set the bar lower, at 3 (see Link). In any case, anything above 5 is considered unaffordable by both the World Bank and the United Nations.

By 1990, the average price of a new 5-room flat was $70,000 and a young graduate earned about $2,000 a month. The AR then was still under 3 – very affordable.

Examining the affordability of current new HDB BTO launches

TRE took the opportunity to examine the affordability of new HDB BTO flats launched in November last year. A total of 7,568 flats were launched by HDB for sale in a mix of mature and non-mature towns on 25 Nov 2014 [Link]. This was HDB’s final sales exercise for 2014.

Sembawang Sun Breeze

Typical 2-room (I):
- Nett selling price less grants = $30,000
- Applicants’ median monthly household income = $1,600
- Price to annual household income = 1.6
Typical 2-room (II):
- Nett selling price less grants = $50,000
- Applicants’ median monthly household income = $1,600
- Price to annual household income = 2.6
Typical 3-room:
- Nett selling price less grants = $115,000
- Applicants’ median monthly household income = $2,500
- Price to annual household income = 3.8
Typical 4-room:
- Nett selling price less grants = $240,000
- Applicants’ median monthly household income = $4,200
- Price to annual household income = 4.8
Sengkang Anchovale Fields

Typical 2-room (I):
- Nett selling price less grants = $45,000
- Applicants’ median monthly household income = $1,600
- Price to annual household income = 2.3
Typical 2-room (II):
- Nett selling price less grants = $70,000
- Applicants’ median monthly household income = $1,600
- Price to annual household income = 3.6
Typical 3-room:
- Nett selling price less grants = $135,000
- Applicants’ median monthly household income = $2,500
- Price to annual household income = 4.5
Typical 4-room:
- Nett selling price less grants = $270,000
- Applicants’ median monthly household income = $4,200
- Price to annual household income = 5.4
Yishun

Typical 2-room (I):
- Nett selling price less grants = $30,000
- Applicants’ median monthly household income = $1,600
- Price to annual household income = 1.6
Typical 2-room (II):
- Nett selling price less grants = $45,000
- Applicants’ median monthly household income = $1,600
- Price to annual household income = 2.3
Typical 3-room:
- Nett selling price less grants = $115,000
- Applicants’ median monthly household income = $2,500
- Price to annual household income = 3.8
Typical 4-room:
- Nett selling price less grants = $240,000
- Applicants’ median monthly household income = $4,200
- Price to annual household income = 4.8
Typical 2-room (I):
- Nett selling price less grants = $30,000
- Applicants’ median monthly household income = $1,600
- Price to annual household income = 1.6
Typical 2-room (II):
- Nett selling price less grants = $50,000
- Applicants’ median monthly household income = $1,600
- Price to annual household income = 2.6
Typical 3-room:
- Nett selling price less grants = $115,000
- Applicants’ median monthly household income = $2,500
- Price to annual household income = 3.8
Typical 4-room:
- Nett selling price less grants = $235,000
- Applicants’ median monthly household income = $4,200
- Price to annual household income = 4.7
Conclusion

For 2-room and 3-room BTO flats in Sembawang and Yishun, they are considered affordable at 4 years of applicants’ median annual salary or less. However, for 4-room flats, the AR is 4.7 to 4.8, way above Mr Khaw’s own target of 4.

In this case, 4-room BTO flats should be priced around $201,600 (4 x $4,200 x 12) instead of the current $235,000 to $240,000 in Sembawang and Yishun (i.e, prices after grants).

For Sengkang, the situation is worse. 2-room flats are priced below AR of 4 but 3-room and 4-room flats have ratios of 4.5 and 5.4 respectively, again, above Mr Khaw’s own target of 4.

In fact, Sengkang 4-room BTO flats (AR of 5.4) are considered unaffordable by the standards laid down by the World Bank and the United Nations. Sengkang 4-room flats, instead of selling for $270,000 (after grants), ought to be selling at $201,600 (4 x $4,200 x 12). They are overpriced by 34%.

One can only conclude that Mr Khaw has yet to fulfill his promise of bringing down ALL the BTO prices in non-mature estates to 4 years of annual salary, especially for first-time Singaporean buyers. The middle-income group appears to be squeezed by the higher new HDB flat prices for 4-room and above. For mature estates, the AR of new BTO flats would naturally be even worse.

So, regardless of what MND is trying to say in its recent survey, the fact of the the matter is, new BTO flats remain expensive and not affordable even by Mr Khaw’s own measure, generally speaking.

Source: www.tremeritus.com
May 18, 2015
Amos Yee: A Dig At TOC – Media Free Of Manipulation Required

Now I also feel compelled to judge the journalistic integrity of my friends at TOC.

This happened before I wrote that lengthy blog post revealing how I was victimized by Vincent’s sodomizing hands.

In lieu of my Facebook post, which they quoted in their own article, I did not apologize to Vincent, I just said I was going to.

But yet, TheOnlineCitizen so boldly put as a headline, ‘Amos Yee apologises for molest allegation against former bailor’

It’s a small difference, but significant nonetheless. A blatant claim that I had already apologized, seems much more convincing than he is about to apologize soon, now doesn’t it?

So you add that little pepper that thestraitstimes commonly use to attempt to salvage your actions, and not lose a huge part of your outreach because you spoke up for him.

Because you don’t want people to feel that the boy whom you so boldly put up on a pedestal to advocate freedom of speech, might be a fucking dick for falsely accusing his bailor of molestation for no good reason, and is not especially remorseful for it.

We’re all capable of twisting the truth a little when things don’t go our way now aren’t we? And with the moral quandary of having both Amos and Vincent on your side, Terry (The writer of TOC), got a little bit flustered, which constituted to that little fuck-up.

So let’s all not choose whether or not to criticize someone just because somebody is on your side, but instead choose to criticize them, because they are wrong.

And from there, we can perhaps more effectively create a political climate and a media, that is honest, and isn’t constantly rife with manipulation.

Source: Amos Yee

May 18, 2015
SDP: Our MPs Will Run Town Councils Full-Time, Not Engage Managing Agent

The main objective of an SDP-managed Town Council (TC) is to maintain a clean and well-kept housing estate while keeping expenditure down so that Services and Conservancy Charges (S&CC) can be kept to a minimum.

The statement was made today at the launch of A Promise To The Residents: The SDP Town Council Management Plan this afternoon.

Presented by Party Secretary-General Chee Soon Juan and Vice-Chairman John Tan, the paper said that SDP MPs will run the TC on a full-time basis rather than engage a managing agent (MA).

Currently, most TCs engage MAs except for the Bishan-Toa Payoh TC. MAs are profit-driven private companies and charge an additional fee for managing the TC. This is an added layer of cost to the residents.

The SDP will, instead, hire qualified and experienced professionals to assist the MPs in running the TC. The savings of not engaging an MA will be passed on to the residents through lower S&CC.

Dr Chee said that while there have been suggestions that MPs be allowed to focus on legislative work in Parliament while leaving the management of TC municipal matters to others, the SDP’s stand is that we relish the challenge of doing both.

In government, lawmakers, especially cabinet ministers, are not only responsible for making laws but also for running their ministries.

Similarly, being able to effectively manage TCs while performing our parliamentary roles such as debating legislation, proposing alternative policies, tabling amendments are part and parcel of our duties.

Managing TCs will provide SDP MPs the necessary platform to excel in management and give the public confidence that we will be able to eventually takeover as government. Dr Chee said: “We welcome the challenge and are confident that we will surpass it.”

Mr John Tan presented some of the initiatives spelt out in the document, including how SDP will effect the transition from an outgoing PAP TC administration for the first 3 days, 7 days and 30 days.

“We have also listed the milestones that we will have hit after the 100-day mark,” Mr Tan said. Some of these include an established TC with fully integrated management teams, a clear budgetary plan, the first interim financial report, etc.

“We’ve laid out these measures and initiatives so that the voters in the coming elections know exactly what to expect when they vote for the SDP,” Dr Chee said. “We invite residents to track our performance.”

This is the only way that we can raise the standard of transparency and accountability in governance in Singapore.

For the full document of A Promise To The Residents, click here.

Source: http://yoursdp.ucoz.org

May 17, 2015
Mohammed Jufrie Mahmood: Foreigner Employed By LTA Overzelaous On Enforcing Laws And Shows No Compassion

This conceited looking officer employed by the LTA must be worth his weight in gold, making tons of money for his employer.

Though he does not admit that he is a foreigner (Malaysian) like most of his colleagues on motorbikes, his attitude betrays his nationality.He neither has any compassion, nor consideration for Singapore road users who may have parked their vehicles, albeit illegally, only for short while. Just take a good look at his arrogant face.

He goes pouncing around akin to raids normally conducted by CNB officers when he goes to his favourite hunting grounds snapping away with his mobile phone camera and skoots off. No grace whatsoever is given. He does not entertain any explanation or pleadings. LTA must be very pleased with his performance.

The lorry below was issued a parking summons for causing obstruction though it was delivering goods and parked within a private property. The overzealous SOB just hantam only. Even cars parked with their drivers in the vehicles are not spared.

Sadly this is the kind of fereigner the PAP loves so much, causing added misery to the long suffering Singaporean motorists.

Keep it up PAP, we motorists will not easily forget. We will hit you hard with a vengence not too long from now!

Source: Mohamed Jufrie Bin Mahmood

May 17, 2015
Francis Micah Law: Not A Mistake For My Father To Bail Amos And Offer Second Chance

So in the recent weeks I’ve been bombarded with many questions about Amos Yee in regards to my father, Vincent Law.

“Why did your dad do it?” “Have you met Amos?” “How do you feel about the allegations that Amos made against you dad?”

Not wanting to jeopardise my reputation for fear of my future, I had decided to stay silent. However, after reading Amos’ latest post, I feel it is time my selfishness came to an end. Amos claimed that nobody but himself knew what was going on? Well, now there’s me.

So let’s begin with “Why did you dad do it?”

My dad did it because he saw a brilliant boy who needed a second chance. He didn’t care for the publicity, he wasn’t “jealous” that Amos was getting all the attention. All he wanted was to help Amos out of his predicament.

In many ways, my dad treated Amos almost like a son. While he may have seemed hard on Amos in front of him, my dad stood up for Amos in more ways than one. Whenever the press questioned him, he would never put Amos down, always painting a positive portrayal of Amos in hopes that that would improve the public opinion of Amos. I’m not saying that my father is right in raising his voice at Amos, but he did it because he cared for him and wanted to fulfil is role as a bailor. Part of my father’s conditions as a bailor was to keep in contact with Amos every 24 hours, which, I must add, Amos wasn’t very compliant to.

There was once Amos came over to my place, he stared long and hard at a luggage tag in the shape of those green aliens from Toy Story 2. Convinced that Amos really liked it, my dad would look through every shop he passed by that might sell the luggage tag. While he did manage to find and purchase a figurine, he never had a chance to give it to him because Amos had already gone and broke his bail terms.

Which leads me to the next question, “Have you met Amos?”

It was about 9 in the morning on the first Saturday after my father had bailed Amos out. I was awoken by loud discussions coming from the living room. Annoyed by the noises I opened my door, and, lo and behold, it was Amos Yee in his pyjamas sitting on my couch.

I still remember his first words to me after we introduced ourselves to each other.

“Hey Francis, your father is a great man. He bailed me out of jail!” With a wide grin on his face.

After I had brushed my teeth, I returned to the living room to see that my brother was receiving the same greetings I had just a few minutes ago.

“Hey Frederick, your father is a great man!” he repeated.

After-which we all sat down and had a chat about his plans for the future as well as our personal thoughts on education and film. I would say we all had a pretty good time. In that space, we all respected each other’s opinions which I was something I really appreciated.

Just before he left (and stared at the luggage tag), he turned around and said, “You know Vincent, I wasn’t so sure about this before, but this was quite nice. We should do this again sometime.”

So yes, I have met Amos.

And of course, “How do you feel about the allegations Amos made against your dad?”

I would be lying if I said I wasn’t angry. In fact, I had half a mind to take legal action against him as well. That’s my father he was defaming!

Then again, no one makes the best decisions when they’re angry so I decided to calm down before taking any further action.

Disclaimer: Before reading this next portion, I would like you to know that I am not using this post to promote my faith. Everything I’m writing is merely my opinion and you have every right to disagree with me.

After I taken a step back and looked at the situation in its totality, I decided there really was no point in me retaliating in anger.

In his post, Amos referred to Mark 3:29. Well, let me quote two passages in the Bible that explains my reaction to his allegations.

Matthew 5:44 “But I say to you, Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you”
Mark 12:31 “The second is this: ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’ There is no other commandment greater than these.”

As a Christian myself, I believe that responding in love instead of hatred would not only be a more peaceful solution, but a more constructive one as well. I could take legal action against him, get him and the media to apologise and so forth, or I could just forgive him and find an alternative solution to protecting my father’s reputation.

Once again, I’d like to stress that I’m not trying to impose my faith on the reader through this post, I’m merely stating my side of the story that wouldn’t be complete without including my beliefs.

At the end of the day, no man is perfect, my father included. We all make mistakes and bad choices. However, my father’s choice in bailing Amos out was not a mistake. I firmly believe that he was right to offer Amos a second chance and I fully support my father in this matter.

I hope that this post clears the air up a bit on the issue pertaining to my father’s tenure as Amos’ bailor. If anyone has any questions regarding what I said above, please do not hesitate to contact me.

Source: Francis Micah Law

May 17, 2015