An analysis of Singapore’s property market this year
November 30th, 2009 | 
Author: By Khalil Adis
[Khalil Adis a former editor of Property Report. He now writes for Property Report, Property Guru and Temasek Review]
2009 has been a roller-coaster ride for Singapore’s private property market and 2010 will be an equally challenging year for the HDB resale market.
A topsy-turvy year
2009 has so far been a year of paradox for Singapore’s private property market which first recorded the worst fall in history in property price index in the first quarter of 2009 followed by a stunning V-shaped recovery with the sharpest increase in a decade in the third quarter.
The first quarter witnessed the price index dropping 14.1 percent quarter-on-quarter.
However, just two quarters later, the private residential market posted a 15.8 percent increase, data from the Urban Redevelopment Authority’s (URA) showed.
According to the URA’s data, prices of non-landed private residential properties increased by 15.2 percent in the core central region, 18.5 percent in the rest of central region and 16.1 percent in the outside central region in the third quarter.
In comparison, prices of non-landed private homes decreased by 5.2 percent, 4.4 percent and 2.3 percent in the core central region, rest of central region and outside central region respectively in the second quarter.
This sharp V-shaped recovery has prompted fears that a property bubble was forming and that property prices in Singapore have become too inflated driven by low interest rates.
So in September, the Singapore government took measures to cool down the property market by making it harder for homebuyers to defer payments by removing the Interest Absorption Scheme (IAS) and Interest-Only Housing Loans (IOL) and releasing more land.
Before the intervention, property showrooms were filled with agents armed with blank cheques acting on behalf of speculators.
This has resulted in escalating property prices, which has put genuine homeowners at a disadvantage.
Property firm DTZ notes that the price hikes since the second quarter of 2009 has resulted in diminishing buying power of Housing Development Board (HDB) upgraders.
The proportion of purchasers with HDB addresses has declined to 37 percent in the third quarter of 2009, from the recent peak of 56 percent in the first quarter.
Anti-speculative measures have worked
The escalating prices, driven by speculators, are a cause for concern as recent data from the Ministry for Trade and Industry (MTI) shows that Singapore is just fresh out of a recession.
Analysts say removing the IAS and IOL schemes will bring stability to the property market, in line with the country’s economic growth.
“The measures are aimed at stabilising the market and not letting prices runaway from the reality of an economic downturn. Any rise in prices should commensurate with the rate of economic expansion,” says Donald Han, managing director for Cushman & Wakefield Singapore.
Two months later, analysts agree that the government’s anti-speculative measures have worked to some extent.
“The government’s strong stand on the need for anti-speculation, coupled with its prompt and immediate response to the rapidly heating market (IAS removal and land release), is what has brought sanity to the property market by weeding out speculators and cautioning would-be private home owners,” says chief executive officer for PropNex, Mohamed Ismail.
“The effect of the anti-speculation measures is targeted more at the buyers in the non-prime market who typically rely more financing to own a private residential property. The removal of Interest Absorption Scheme and Interest Only Loans also forced these buyers to be more prudent in their purchases as they are no longer allowed to defer their loan repayment. The reassurance of ample supply as provided by the government’s injection of sites into the first half of 2010 confirmed list, under the government land sales programme, has also softened the run-up effect,” says Dr Chua Yang Liang, head of research for Jones Lang LaSalle for Southeast Asia.
Subsales down
According to Jones Lang LaSalle, the overall monthly volume of purchases for October 2009 has declined by 29 percent from 1, 143 units in September to 811 units.
This is the third contraction since August 09 and also the second lowest sales volume achieved for the first ten months of 2009 since January 09 when 108 units were sold.
Jones Lang LaSalle also notes that this measure has resulted in a decrease in subsales – a measure of how much speculation there is in the property market.
“ The recent announcement of measures to curb speculative behaviour seems to have taken effect as seen in the subsales market. Proportion of subsales level has fallen to 7.9 percent in October from the 12 percent recorded in September,” says Dr Chua.
However, analysts say it is too early to tell if some measures, such as the interest-absorption scheme (IAS), should be restored,
“The IAS removal only played a small part of the government measures. But even as such, we do not think it is necessary for IAS restoration within the next one year,” says Mohamed Ismail.
Falling rentals
While property prices were escalating in the third quarter, rentals continued to decline in the same period.
According to the URA, the rental price index for private property has dropped 2.2 percent in the third quarter.
“The rental price index has dropped 20.4 percent to its current third quarter level of 129.3, and its recent decline of 2.2 percent is actually its lowest decline in four quarters,” says Mohamed Ismail.
Analysts note that rentals were declining, as landlords were willing to drop their rents during the recession.
“Rentals for private properties could be explained by the fact that in the bad economy, landlords were willing to lease out their property for lower prices. Given that rental agreements last for an extended period of time, we should see a lag in the recovery of the rental price index behind the more visible recovery of the property price index,” says Mohamed Ismail.
Therefore, the fourth quarter could see rentals going up in tandem with the recovering economy.
2010 and beyond
Going forward, analysts expect sales volume for private homes to ease, as there are fewer mass-market projects in the pipeline plus the government’s measures to cool the property market.
“Transaction volume in the non-landed segment is likely to contract by a further 10 to 20 percent due in part to the seasonal slow down and also the effect from the recent government announcements,” says Dr Chua.
Home prices are also likely to see some level of stabilisation with more moderate increase to more sustainable levels with less volatility.
This is because about 70 percent of the current buyers in recent residential launches choose the normal progress payment while the rest opted for the IAS.
However, analysts warned that the Singapore government could impose more measures to cool the property market should price continue escalating.
“Should housing price growth continue to surge ahead of economic fundamental despite these recent moral persuasion by the government to cool residential demand, further anti-speculative measures with a bigger bite could be introduced such as capital gains tax say for those who flip within a two year period of the first purchase,” says Dr Chua.
In October, the Monetary Authority of Singapore’s (MAS) expressed concern that a speculative bubble could form, prompting them to take possible further measures, on top of the release of land announced recently for mass-market developments.
Although the government has yet to announce such possible measures, prospective homeowners should assess their financial position before taking a plunge in the private property market.
The HDB market outlook
Following public criticism that there was not enough supply of HDB flats in the market, Minister for National Development Mah Bow Tan announced in parliament recently that the HDB will release 10, 000 to 12, 000 new flats every year for the next five years.
By releasing more supply however, the HDB is caught between the devil and the deep blue sea.
While releasing more flats will help quell the public’s frustration with the HDB, such measure will also bring down the value of HDB flats due to its market based pricing approach.
“Although HDB is slated to release a total of 13, 500 Build-To-Order (BTO) flats this year (by the end of 2009), an oversupply would only serve to dampen the asset value of a majority of Singaporeans who are dwelling in HDB flats,” says Mohamed Ismail.
Meanwhile, the HDB resale market will likely witness more transactions this year.
Acording to Propnex, there is a continual supply of resale flats which could potentially see 40, 000 transactions this year alone.
It adds that should the economy recover well, this could lead to greater demand in the HDB resale market due to a a greater number of Singaporeans being able to hold well-paying or stable jobs, or if there is a greater number of permanent residents in the market.
Such news mean Singaporeans should brace themselves for escalating prices in the resale market next year – just at a time when elections are coming.
The latest HDB Price Index (RPI) is now at a record high of 145.2 points – a growth of 3.6 percent over the previous quarter.
About the Author:
Khalil Adis was a former editor for Property Report magazine covering Singapore, Malaysia and Indonesia. During his course of work he has travelled to all three countries to cover their property markets extensively. He has also interviewed politicians like Singapore’s Minister for National Development Mah Bow Tan, Kuala Lumpur’s Mayor Dato’ Ahmad Fuad Ismail and Malaysia’s Energy, Green Technology and Water Minister Datuk Peter Chin. He now writes for Property Report, Property Guru and Temasek Review.
You can read more of Khalil’s articles on:
www.property-report.com and www.propertyguru.com.sg
Other articles by Khalil Adis:
>> Demand vs supply: so many applicants, but so few flats
>> Home affordability: HDB versus the public
Posted in 42 Responses to “An analysis of Singapore’s property market this year”
Loading ...
Alex Tan Allan Ooi AWARE Chee Soon Juan Chiam See Tong Claire Lee David Widjaja DBS Dr Allan Ooi Dr Silviu Ionescu Dr Vivian Balakrishnan Foyce Le Xuan highnote5 Hong Lim Park Jack Lin Xinli Jack Neo Jack Neo affair Jack Neo scandal Josie Lau Josie Lau Meng Lee Lee Kuan Yew Lehman brothers Lighthouse Evangelism MAS minibonds Miss Singapore World NTU stabbing PAP Pastor Rony Tan Ris Low Romanian diplomat in hit-and-run Rony Tan S-League silviu ionescu Singapore Singapore 2010 Youth Olympic Games Tan Kin Lian Thio Su Mien Tiger Woods affair Tong Kok Wai Top 8 Vivian Balakrishnan Wendy Chong Y O G Youth Olympic Games
WP Cumulus Flash tag cloud by Roy Tanck and Luke Morton requires Flash Player 9 or better.
Hmm… so much talk about private property. How come there is a section on the rental of private property, but none on the rental value of HDB units?
“… an oversupply would only serve to dampen the asset value of a majority of Singaporeans who are dwelling in HDB flats,” says Mohamed Ismail.
wait a minute. i thought dampening is a good thing? that means the young people get an easier time (instead of spending a lifetime) paying for their HDB flat. the older people can buy one with a larger room or an extra room without coughing up another lifetime of money. isn’t it an easier thing?
am i missing something here? am i the only one who thinks this is a good thing for the people?
please explain.
You are not wrong. There are some people who think like you.
Dampening is a good thing for new flat buyers (less than 10% of the population). They will have an easier time paying for the flats.
It is also true that current flat owners(80% of the population) will not be happy that their flat’s value will drop. Not all of them think like you, that they would want to purchase another flat that is more spacious. Different people, different opinion. You did not miss anything. You just need to try to think from the buyer’s, the seller’s and the neutral party’s perspectives.
Sim Lian wins S$80.5 mln HDB contract
Sim Lian Construction Co (Pte) Ltd, has been awarded an $80.5 million contract by the Housing & Development Board for the building works at Punggol East Contract 24A, total 519 dwelling units
Assuming flats are all uniform in size, cost per flat approx. 160k
damper,
HDB (PAP) is not interested in up and coming couples or old people. The people of concern are those who will reap an exorbitant profit on the sale of their flat. It seems that in the grand scheme, only the very rich that had their flat only for investment purposes will benefit from this policy of undersupply.
As new couples can’t afford a flat and older downgraders will lose much when they purchase a new flat, only the rich who do not depend on the flat sold as their primary dwelling, or are simply filthy rich like our ministers won’t care less as only they stand to gain when buying high and selling higher.
A recent queenstown fiasco to the tune of $653,000 for a 4 room flat does come to mind. Lets not forget the foreign clowns that spoil the market too.
And dont you think an undersupply is just plain ridiculous when singles aren’t entitled to purchase a flat till after 35?
It’s not that land is limited or they can’t build fast enough, it’ artificial manipulation of Supply while Demand is high to Fix the price of accomodation as high as possible.
This is always the case with Monopolies.
“to provide affordable housing to the masses” – A classic example of a “Load of Bull”!
Too many Economists in government!
Do read:
http://singaporewatch.org/?p=1200
Let me try to explore solutions. There has been too much whining about this issue. And if the current administrators are unable to manage their system properly, go ahead and take the ideas of the people. We do not need to be paid peanuts by administrators for using our ideas, nor are we trying to take over their lucrative jobs. We just want our country to be better.
The people know now. We do not have a free property market. It is glaringly obvious, yet this simple fact is not stated plainly whether in state media or even in alternative websites.
It is not dificult to understand. We have somewhat free demand – everyone can buy private, and many people including PRs can buy HDB. We do not have free supply. 90% of the housing market, the HDB, is regulated supply. And of late, there has been discordant management of this HDB supply.
There is a reason HDB restricted building over the last few years. Do you really think Wong Kan Seng forgot to tell Mah he is inviting more than 90,000 new people in to buy HDB flats for 3 years, and more to come?
The administrators consciously wanted to raise flat prices. There is a plan involved – for example, they can more easily implement the retirement scheme they envisage – for you to sell your property, downgrade, cash out, retire. They could not do it as effectively when prices were lower, because there wasn’t much money locked in to be released.
It is likely they overshot their targets, and did it too fast. They angered the people.
Was the plan correct? To do controlled inflation of this asset which is owned by 80% of Singaporeans, in order to let them cash out later? Can’t we carry out this grand retirement plan without touching these prices so drastically? That is for another discussion and they pay president’s scholars very well to come up with an answer.
But the effect of this questionably brilliant market manipulation is that they played with the supply of this unfree market too much. And to disguise it, we continue to call it a free market. We would look like fools if we told people our HDB market was a free market. We would seem like ignoramuses in economics. Only the HDB gets to build as many flats as they want, judging the demand as they see fit. This is very obviously not free market, and it the effect snowballs from here.
Even the demand side is not spared of manipulation. Which power can import 300,000 people in a span of 3 years and give them all the right to buy HDB flats? The pool of people eyeing HDB flats increased from about 3,400,000 (citizens and PRs) to the current 3,700,000+. You raised the demand by 10%. Did you increase the supply by 10%? 10% of supply is 90,000 flats. Our supply did not grow anywhere close to that figure at all.
What is the grand plan in this? Assume the president’s scholar was not sleeping over the last 3 years. He knows all this, but he let it happen. The motive partly was to push people into private property – get them out of the subsidy system.
Also more urgently, it was to support asset prices and not let property collapse with the financial crisis. Asset values support book values and liquidity ratios in the financial system. Singapore’s economy was the worst hit of all our neighbours, strongly in the lead in this respect. If they did not artificially prop up values in property, the crash would have been worse. Huge numbers of people would go negative-equity. Banks would have ugly numbers on their loan books, at least for a good while.
Doing this, we cushioned the economy’s freefall. We sacrificed the people for a while.
Now that the economy has stopped falling, we’re picking up the pieces, reversing the manipulation. And since the administration wants high HDB prices to support its retirement financing scheme, it is reluctant to return prices to levels even just 5 years ago.
To succeed in this, you have to distract the people so that they forget what prices were like 5 years ago (or even earlier). You constantly repeat what seems to be the law of the universe, that 30% of your income over 30 years is God’s Will. You don’t mention that it usually was 15% over 15 years. That does not help distract the people.
It is no fault of the PRs really. They were invited by the administrators to come, paricipate, invest and prosper together. The PRs did not dictate immigration policy – they did not determine how many would come every year, nor how suddenly they would come.
When they came, they have to live somewhere, and since the administrators did not build homes for them, they are forced to rent. And they figured, why should I rent from the fat landlords when the same money can be used to buy at the current inflated prices – still wiser than renting.
Coincidentally, maybe intentionally, rules of rental were relaxed in 2007. It’s a business free for all now. I’m sure even the PRs are renting out as well.
All these added together makes the system quite a different animal from what it was just 5 years ago.
I urge that we do not bark up the wrong tree. It is pointless griping about PRs buying flats or having money. We look at the cause of the problem again.
Supply of flats – determined by HDB.
How they determine what is the real demand – those applying for BTOs, ignoring those who cannot or have given up applying for BTOs, or have given up on current prices altogether.
Increasing of demand – how many eligible people join the pool – new citizens converted from the PR pool, new PRs converted from the non-PR foreigner pool, newly eligible married, new singles.
Financing systems, whether COV can be paid for through other means, or will that lead to excessive new demand – people who were formerly unable to pay the COV.
Commission systems, should an agent earn $2000 from transacting a small flat or $4000 from transacting a big flat, cos it is so big he spends more energy sweating it out and transacting it with earnest. Or maybe HDB transactions might be $500. Or DIY just like how you DIY registering for your marriage these days.
All these fundamentals need to be questioned. Throw out old misconceptions, euphemisms, such as
“HDB is a free market”
“affordability = 30%”
“agents must earn 1%, 2%, it is hard work for them”
“if I don’t pay $30k COV, my dream home will be snapped up by others”
“i can get great returns renting out HDB because building supply is low and will remain low – this business is invulnerable”
We are able to address all these issues.
If we face them frankly, call a spade a spade.
If we dare to.
Stop kidding ourselves. Both ruling party and opposition would look silly.
The government should be fair to older and younger generation. While the older generation can enjoy capital due to economics progress, the younger generation cannot be expected to cough blood just to get a decent place to stay!!!
Hello alternative,
Excellent analysis. However you left out the credit part of the story. Property price booms are fueled by easy credit that encourages speculation or those who cannot afford buying property in the first place.
Residential mortgage lending policies of Singapore banks are, in my opinion, too lax. Allowing banks to lend up to 90% LTV over loan tenor of 30 years is too generous and arguably risky. Maximum LTV should be reduced to 75-80%, and maximum tenor to 20-25 years.
Once credit and liquidity is cut, asset prices will come back down to earth.
“It is also true that current flat owners(80% of the population) will not be happy that their flat’s value will drop. Not all of them think like you, that they would want to purchase another flat that is more spacious. Different people, different opinion. You did not miss anything. You just need to try to think from the buyer’s, the seller’s and the neutral party’s perspectives.”
1) seller’s perspective – if prices drop, i sell my 3 room at low price, i top up low price, i upgrade to 5 room. i’m happy.
2) buyer’s perspective – if prices drop, i buy your 3 room flat at low price, i’m happy.
3) neutral party’s perspective – not sure what is this. investor’s perspective however is – i hold 1 investment flat, i’m not living in it. it’s my business, if it drop i lugi, if it rises good, and rentals go up.
i.e.
price drop = good for everyone using the flat as a home EXCEPT investors.
Nobody complains if char kway teow drops in price cos we all eat it. except people who think it’s unhealthy. we just dont realise flats are like a char kway teow we eat everyday ….
Hello Googler,
you said: Residential mortgage lending policies of Singapore banks are, in my opinion, too lax. Allowing banks to lend up to 90% LTV over loan tenor of 30 years is too generous and arguably risky. Maximum LTV should be reduced to 75-80%, and maximum tenor to 20-25 years.
to pull it off, you need to have people willing to take this lifetime of loan. 30 years. 30% of their income.
nobody has done that before in the past. it was considered silly. for an HDB flat, people didn’t have to slog THAT hard.
the way to pull it off is to make the people forget that this isn’t the norm. that it used to be lower % over fewer years. to do that, you try to avoid mentioning old prices, old % repayments, old number of years loan tenure. don’t harp on this.
harp on the new figures instead. 30%. 30 years. affordable. non-mature. non-mature.
i must admit i’m already getting distracted by this reeducation ….
“The government should be fair to older and younger generation. While the older generation can enjoy capital due to economics progress, the younger generation cannot be expected to cough blood just to get a decent place to stay!!!”
wrong. the younger generation are better educated, better career opportunities,better income,much better quality of life( though overall consumer prices have gone up) compared to older generation. they also are well positioned to INHERIT their parent’s wealth/assets and that would help to ease future financial burdens considerably.
“price drop = good for everyone using the flat as a home EXCEPT investors.”
wrong. 90% homes here are privately owned therefore, ALL ARE INVESTORS. it is not in any investor’s interest to see their asset value drop! that said, the newer generation will also gain from their parent’s asset(hypothetically) so eventually, they maybe compensated for their higher entry price factor into the property market.
so it is more of a a win win for everybody that is if the large number of foreign ownership and the unstable economy don’t screw us all first!
one more thing i must add to my previous comment. an unstable home market(one that goes UP and DOWN and UP again) in home prices usually benefit the richer owners who can afford to trade up and down but is hard on the poor. therefore, a stable and growing market is most equitable for all. i believe the government is trying to achieve that.
//observer:
Quote – observer on Tue, 1st Dec 2009 7:44 pm:
“wrong. the younger generation are better educated, better career opportunities,better income,much better quality of life( though overall consumer prices have gone up) compared to older generation. they also are well positioned to INHERIT their parent’s wealth/assets and that would help to ease future financial burdens considerably.”
Unquote
This is far from the truth. Just take a look at Japan. Residential properties have become so expensive that it is necessary for families to take a multi-generation mortgage just to afford a roof over their heads. In any case your argument has already been debunked by 2 NUS professors. Search this website for the link. What about children from less well to do families with nothing to inherit?
Inflated asset price benefits only the government (from stamp duty and land sales), developers, and investors. I don’t see how reduced affordability benefits the average man in the street.
observer on Tue, 1st Dec 2009 7:44 pm
“..they also are well positioned to INHERIT their parent’s wealth/assets and that would help to ease future financial burdens considerably…”
Only if you are the only child in your family. Otherwise what inheritance there is?
“…the younger generation are better educated, better career opportunities,better income,much better quality of life…”
You would be surprised that better educated NOT equal to career opportunities nor necessary better income or quality of life. Why? Every generation B4 you works harder than the generation follow – better tools and better technology BUT THE CHALLENGES ARE DIFFERENT. Your knowledge becomes obsolete faster. What is the product life cycle of black and white television, compared to fax machine and now internet email? The competition the previous generation, even mine is who is my workplace competitor but NOW is GLOBAL.
The Japanese saw their shipbuilding eclipsed by Korean the way US car manufacturer got swept aside by foreign imports and foreign car manufacturers in US. If you are displaced, you cannot find another similar job no matter if you are better educated than your forefathers. And to compete globally, you might have to often compete PHYSICALLY GLOBALLY AS WELL – that means relocation of your family, kids education, wife’s career etc and sometime your wife might work in London and you worked in Tianjing, where is your kids then? Life better?
I would NOT be so sure? And would there be a job for you in Singapore if your industry is wiped out as MNC re-located operations abroad. Drive taxi like the Stanford PHD is better career opportunity and better life?
Rising prices for property better in those circumstances? You are chasing a conceptual ghost of wealth – MOVING FEAST with bigger and bigger mortgage and then when your career and employment fell into disused well, what is going to happen? Feel good?
Never mind your inheritance, a lower property price give you a safety net when all else fell apart, your family got a place to stay.
Higher property price, I believe, has been orchestrated as a deliberate policy to “inflate” the economy – profit from land sales in housing development, prop up a token property and construction sector sitting alongside banking. Property-related lending account for over 40% of domestic lending. Without it, where does the banks gets their earnings to grow their domestic operation and foreign investments (in some cases catastrophic losses from ill-advised acquisition without crashing the banks involved) cushioned from domestic banking income.
Ask yourself this truthful question – without the foreign dominated banking sector and manufacturing sectors, what is singapore economy beside international trade?? NOTHING!!
Higher land value prop up domestic economy AND GOVERNMENT’S COFFER be it residential, commercial or industrial development, NOT BENEFICIAL to end customers be it foreign investors putting up manufacturing and processing business here or Singaporeans needing residential accomodation.
Singaoporeans owning HDB are just lessors in reality but even if private property, it is NOT investing because what you sold, you need to buy even higher costs alternative (unless you downgrade). You cannot live in a tent on Changi Beach or anywhere else waiting for price to come down to re-establish yourself. Do you think you are so bright and lucky to speculate correctly property cycles? If so, why would you want a job instead of re-cycling huge profits from property speculation?
And how many is that talented AND LUCKY at the same time and on every occasions? It is a fictional dream, observer!
observer said:
“price drop = good for everyone using the flat as a home EXCEPT investors.”
wrong. 90% homes here are privately owned therefore, ALL ARE INVESTORS. it is not in any investor’s interest to see their asset value drop! that said, the newer generation will also gain from their parent’s asset(hypothetically) so eventually, they maybe compensated for their higher entry price factor into the property market.
90% homes here are privately owned and therefore, all are “CONSUMERS”. you will see that this is a more correct word.
take this situation. deflate HDB prices back to 2006 levels (yes, just 3 years) … what happens?
1) i’m a new buyer. i want a new flat. it is easier for me now when prices have deflated.
2) i’m an existing owner. i’ve lived in punggol for 20 years. i wish to smell Ang Mo Kio. it’s easier for me now.
3) i’m in Ang Mo Kio but now with 2 children. they need another room. it’s easier for me now.
4) my parents are old and they want to move in to be looked after. i need another room too. it’s easier.
5) i’m old now, i need money. i downgrade / sell / rent. i get less now due to the deflation. however, as in all deflation, when such paper / asset wealth contracts, invariably other things follow – it is possible for even other costs of living to contract / deflate. it’s possible that with a reduced asset value, purchasing power does not have to shrink equally.
in the first 4 cases, it is obvious deflation is beneficial. in the 5th case, it is arguable.
now we wonder, should we deflate, maintain prices, or inflate?
it is easiest to answer the third part of this question – should we inflate?
we have been inflating for 40+ years now. we have inflated 30+% in just 3 years. it takes our local bank savings interest more than 30 years to inflate our savings the same amount. we ask again, should we inflate HDB prices?
1) we pay more to buy, but we end up having more to sell next time when we’re old. but we paid more to buy! back to square one again?
2) what’s wrong with just keeping it the same price? who suffers? the government? the builder? the buyer? the seller? the tenant? who suffers when HDB prices remain flat for good, just as savings interest or CPF interest remain rather flat for good?
so is this deliberate inflation correct? are we artificially achieving the new government retirement plan of “Selling Your HDB Flat To Fund Your Old Age” at the expense of a whole lot of other qualities of life, whether you’re young and without flat, whether you’re upgrading or moving closer to town, whether you’re expanding your family?
was it a mistake?
if so, do we dare to acknowledge the mistake?
@ observer on Tue, 1st Dec 2009 7:44 pm
…”so it is more of a a win win for everybody that is if the large number of foreign ownership and the unstable economy don’t screw us all first!”
Another fallacy of thought.
Government knows most foreigners would not stay for long. They are speculators who if caught buying at the wrong end, could return to their homeland and disappeared from mortgage obligations. The banks will force sell in those circumstances. And if they bought in at right price but out of job in a downturn, they might return “home” and find it necessary to liquidate here so they can buy their home abroad. They are unlikely to be able to earn their RMB or Rupees salary and expect to service their mortgage here given currency differentials.
And then what happen. Property market crash. Who get caught if they also bought at the high end – local “investors” (read speculators). And for those well-to-do, they cannot sit around idle. They return home looking for economic opportunity and their apartment here locked up. No rooms available to let. When the economy rebounds, they might still be working abroad and unable and unwilling to return. Housing shortages and rental escalation. Property prices shot through the roof again.
Locals doing all the chasing and new arrivals – they are trapped in the high cycle.
A VERY LARGE POOL OF HIGHLY MOBILE MIGRANT WILL EXAGGERATE THE PRICE VOLATILITY OF HOUSING SECTOR.
Observer, do you think you will be lucky to catch the timing right each time? Just caught once at the top end will ruin your life if you job require you to travel abroad and YOU CANNOT SELL YOUR PLACE FOR A LOSS IN THE MEANTIME.
Is this better life with a huge load of foreigners with short-term investment in housing market which YOU NEED FOR HOUSING LONG-TERM ACCOMODATION AND CRAZY PRICE VOLAILITY??
Think again, observer, your observation is very shallow and short-sighted of reality.
I care not what puppet is placed on the throne of England to rule the Empire, …The man that controls Britain’s money supply controls the British Empire. And I control the money supply.
- Baron Nathan Mayer Rothschild
Give me control of a nation’s money
and I care not who makes the laws.
- Mayer Amschel Rothschild
The trade of the petty usurer is hated with most reason: it makes a profit from currency itself, instead of making it from the process which currency was meant to serve. Their common characteristic is obviously their sordid avarice.
- Aristotle
When you combine ignorance and leverage, you get some pretty interesting results.
- Warren Buffet
google,
japan situation is far more complicated than sg. being a large and politically complex country, they do not have the advantage like us to micro manage society and the economy. though we have our fair share of “mismanaging” the property market prior to 2000, i hope we have learnt invaluable lessons this time round to contain a cycle of menace..
get real,
i don’t disagree with most of your observaton however, exactly how many(IN SG) will suffer the raw end of globalisation which i am afraid, without the relevant statistics and considering a wide spectrum of economic and social factors, we can only speculate and your selective arguments maybe over exaggerated perhaps?
yes, progress is ruthless to the new generation of workers. but like food, we may enjoy “fine dinning” for a period but after that, we have to settle back on staple – hopefully. so at some point in time, the leaders must come back down to the basics and steer an economy that would have long term benefits for those who care about a balance life – get real that is.
as for now, it appears the leader’s strategy favors a high growth, high value and debts driven economy to quick or instant wealth(mistake?maybe). naturally, land prices, cost of living and business rises. that also strengthen our reserves or gov’s coffers and enable us to expand abroad – good for some and not good for others(as you have stated).
but lets get back to your costly humble abode. overall, you must agree that more have benefited from higher asset value. for example, the largely middle income group and above(at least hdb 4rms and above) can opt to downgrade or rent out rooms to tie over financial difficulties . at the bottom of the housing market, for those who can’t downgrade further without losing roof over their heads they can, in the long term, still monetize their asset through gov schemes such aslease buy back or if circumstances permit, rent out a room otherwise ,turn to social services for help
as for those entering the market, gov subsidies have made homes more affordable depending on your income level. how much the gov is willing to subsidize can be fine tuned if need be i am sure.
so how can anyone says homes here are beyond affordability or expensive? i tend to believe that those who complain are not realistic because, they have become choosy savvy investors hoping for a tidy profit in future.
yes, we are all investors at the end of the day for too many times i have heard young home owners say that they will sell their flats IF THE PRICE IS RIGHT.
“Do you think you are so bright and lucky to speculate correctly property cycles? If so, why would you want a job instead of re-cycling huge profits from property speculation?”
unquote
in fact, a stable market should fend off short term speculators which is better for the market. think about that. .
lastly, in regard to inheritance, look at the big picture. billions of dollars worth of properties will one day fall on somebody. with LOW birth rate,what’s the problem?(for the lucky generation)
ps: i shall get back to your other comments later.
//observer
Quote observer on Wed, 2nd Dec 2009 7:21 am says –
japan situation is far more complicated than sg. being a large and politically complex country, they do not have the advantage like us to micro manage society and the economy. though we have our fair share of “mismanaging” the property market prior to 2000, i hope we have learnt invaluable lessons this time round to contain a cycle of menace..
Unquote
This is a sweeping generalization without answering the points raised. Such replies are not very different from the usual tactics of this government in answering critics when compared with international benchmarks – we are unique, don’t compare us with other countries. Think ministers’ pay, political freedom, immigration policy, etc.
You have in your long response painted a very bright picture on soaring property prices while conveniently ignoring the risks. I would appreciate your opinion to address my point –
Residential properties in Japan have become so expensive that it is necessary to take multi-generation mortgage loans to afford them. These children are inheriting liabilities, not wealth. How would Singapore benefit if someday should Singapore’s residential properties become as unaffordable as those in Japan today?
@ observer on Wed, 2nd Dec 2009 7:21 am
“i don’t disagree with most of your observaton”
Glad to hear that. You obviously realised I argue robustly but not emotionally which would otherwise mutually devalue this debate.
….”without the relevant statistics and considering a wide spectrum of economic and social factors, we can only speculate ..”
At least we agree that globalisation HAS IMPACT but NOT QUANTIFIABLE STATISTICALLY. In real life, a lot of impact are anecdotal because decision-making will always be under certain unknown and uncertainty. The anecdotal evidence is compelling and telling of consequences – there is NO SPECULATION in this regard. Only the impact not measurable by specific parameters. Anyone losing a job now is NOT bone shaking, it is life shaking because industry disappeared to China however skillful they are. Everything before your eyes looks rosy turn into darkness.
Consider this – AND I AM TERRIFIED OF CONSEQUENCES – if US dollar head further south by another 8 to 10%, I see a definite prospect that Jurong Industrial Estate will be a ghost town. Ask any experienced businessmen around you and see if this is exaggeration. And if you work for a MNC,the earth fell underneath you. I am NOT joking.
“… leaders must come back down to the basics and steer an economy that would have long term benefits…”
It climb back so easy? Ask GM, Chryler and Ford, disaster in business is a SERIES OF BLIND ERROR STEPS, not a single step. ECONOMY IS MUCH BIGGER. In true life, choices must be made within constraints and choices thus made WILL DELIMIT FUTURE CHOICES. You may disagree with me here BUT I SEE BIG MISTAKES HERE IN ECONOMIC MISMANAGEMENT – that is why restructuring has to be done urgently post-meltdown and for that to take shape of effective outcome in the future ( If they are successful and BIG IF THEY RISKS CORRECT DECISION STEPS FORWARD – TWO BIG IFS), it will take years to have impact. But what is another meltdown due to Asian property and stock markets bubble striking at us again? A weakend economy has not survival and sustaining balance, what would happen to your life
then, observer?
Tell you a simple truth – MORE PEOPLE GOT KILLED IN BULL MARKET THEN PEOPLE HURT AND CRASHED IN A BEAR MARKET. Why , you chase up the ever higher and higher escalator of price unwilling to sell out and wait for the crash and then it crashed, you carry a dead baby. In bear market, you carry something “chea”seeming worthless, BUT IT WONT FALL FURTHER AND YOU WON’T GET HURT. That is the fallacy of bull market in shares, why should property be an exception UNLESS YOU ARE CLAIRVOYANT. You may be an exception of foresight, but the majority won’t be that clairvoyant of opportunities and downfall.
SUCCESS AND JOY FOR MOST IN LIFE IS OFTEN SHORT AND SWEET, THE DOWNFALL IS LONG AND BITTER AND A VERY HIGH MAJORITY HAS NEVER GOT SKILLS TO COME BACK AT ALL. I see plenty in my life time.
High property asset value is an ILLUSION OF WEALTH.
I paid of my property asset long time ago BUT I TRULY DOES NOT WANT IT TO APPRECIATE. You might think I am stupid or illogical or both. I view it different, my property is for accomodation first, my survival income and retirement must come from somewhere. If this asset is my las survival bastion, I AM IN DEEP TROUBLE ALREADY.
LIFE IS ABOUT PROGRESS NOT ABOUT BURIED IN DEEP TROUBLE OF ASSET SALE FOR SURVIVAL.
And in “progress” life is very tough, Singaporeans ARE NOT BETTER OFF DESPITE SO-CALLED HIGHLY EDUCATED because skills are redundant fast and irrelevance to PLACE. Your skill might be in great demand in China or India but if you are retrenched here, you cannot apply for the same job in those countries.
Survival now is low costs living – including housing and you need to build a good nest for find success formula other than property speculation.
And if the property market is stable, no speculation – much easier for upcoming generation to find a home. I am all for that.
In speculation you don’t add value – the wealth through speculation disappear through speculation as well but in other economic activity, you add value and those wealth as sustainable.
@observer
Paper wealth propped up by asset prices is meaningless as soon as that wealth needs to be spent.
Even more so when such “wealth” is mostly debt.
Our government believes correctly that through economic growth increasing debt can ultimately be paid.
This relation holds only if the benefits of such economic growth accrues to those that hold the debt.
For example, if the government is the one that takes on debt because of stimulus spending, they should be able to pay of such debt when they realize the benefits of that spending, ie through increased tax receipts from economic growth.
Now apply the same process to increased debt burdens on private individuals here because of rocketing residential property prices, until they benefit from economic growth in the form of increased wages, all such price inflation just serves to place them in longer debt cycles.
Furthermore, we fail to see that a 40% increase in home prices today does not mean we pay 40% more, when you factor in longer loan tenures interests costs can double – ultimately the major beneficiary of such price speculation are creditors.
This is a structural transfer of wealth from labor to capital, if you belong to the capital class all is well and good, but if you are part of the 80% then good luck.
alternative,
you can’t drive down property prices without social and economic repercussion at this point. so the solution is to be realistic and live within your means.worse scenario, pressure the gov for more housing subsidies instead.
get real,
i have hinted foreign born home owners may post a problem in future. soon, half of our housings will be foreign born occupied(rental and owner’s occupied). like you, i am concern. perhaps further tightening of housing and banking laws to protect our interests is in the cards.
google,
“How would Singapore benefit if someday should Singapore’s residential properties become as unaffordable as those in Japan today?”
i don’t think we will price our people out. the vast majority will be ale to afford a roof over their heads but whether such a high strung city is sustainable or not in the long term, i won’t want to bet on it. the fact we are relying more and more on foreigners is not a good omen.
i think we need to slowly undo our greed.
get real,
“I paid of my property asset long time ago BUT I TRULY DOES NOT WANT IT TO APPRECIATE. You might think I am stupid or illogical or both. I view it different, my property is for accomodation first, my survival income and retirement must come from somewhere. If this asset is my las survival bastion, I AM IN DEEP TROUBLE ALREADY.”
your ability to fully pay for your property is directly or indirectly link to asset appreciation. if you approve of what you see around you and enjoyed the “high standard of living” here, you would restrain yourself from demeaning and under appreciating a coveted piece of tiny property.
you will surely be in deep trouble if your molten clay crumles!
“you can’t drive down property prices without social and economic repercussion at this point.”
yes you can. the administration tried to even deny we have a problem of massive inflation of public housing (much more so than private housing). that didn’t turn out very well.
now they look silly, as if one ministry headed by a yearly millionaire didn’t talk to the other ministry’s head.
it’s not up to you or me really. it’s up to how they judge whether their next action will affect votes in what manner.
and in all likelihood, many people who are home CONSUMERS (as opposed to actual investors, please don’t lump them together cos there is really a difference) do not understand that it helps them as consumers to have low product pricing, cos they consume the product daily.
and it’s not just the government that tries to perpetuate this myth. most people in the industry – developers, agents etc all try to perpetuate this myth.
and it’s VERY EASY to perpetuate. who doesn’t feel good when something that they own go up in price? they just don’t realise the implications.
when it comes to another product, it becomes more obvious. if your car goes up in price but you already own one, you don’t feel so bad … until you buy another one, or it’s time for you to own that Mercedes finally cos you’re 50 years old. that’s when you realise it becomes impossible.
public education. simple concepts. but shrouded with many myths.
@observer on Wed, 2nd Dec 2009 4:22 pm
“..your ability to fully pay for your property is directly or indirectly link to asset appreciation…”
No, that is definitely incorrect. My ability to pay for my property is DEPENDENT ON MY INCOME AFTER I COMMITTED TO A BUY DECISION.
If it appreciates, it does NOT adversely (or positively) affect my ability to pay – that liability is tied to a fixed HISTORICAL CONTRACT.
And if the property depreciates, I DON’T get a discount at all. What I contrcted for is what I have to pay and I had paid it long ago.
After paying for it – IT IS MEANINGLESS TO ME what it appreciates (so what I can’t sell it and camp on Pasir Ris beach) or depreciates (which I have no control).
In so saying, I am NOT “demeaning and under appreciating a coveted piece of tiny property.” I AM NOT SO HYPED UP BY TALK OF ILLUSIONARY WEALTH BECAUSE I don’t feel richer nor poorer – just simply a place I caome back to after work or business.
If it is my second property which I buy for purely investment motive, then obviously I hope I made the “right” business decision and make some good profits from it just like every other business risks decision I took in life. BUT UNLIKE MANY OTHERS, I DON’T HAVE A PENCHANT FOR LAZY MONEY and I have other finance needs for my ongoing business.
Your quote
…” perhaps further tightening of housing and banking laws to protect our interests is in the cards….”
This is an immigration issue bloating up volatitlity in housing sector. Government knows that PRs are here temporary
http://news.asiaone.com/News/AsiaOne%2BNews/Singapore/Story/A1Story20091123-181787.html
It is a floating population – expanding and shrinking very fast and probably linked to economic cycles of prosperity or poverty that give or deny them the economic means to stay or leave or buy or rent. IT IS A BALLOON, inflate and deflate AND THEREBY EXAGERATE THE CYCLICAL IMPACT ON PUBLIC HOUSING AND THE MINISTRY CANNOT PLAN EFFECTIVELY TO CATER FOR SUDDEN INCREASE OR DECREASE IN DEMAND.
Owning property for Singaporean them becomes a wild gambling decision instead of a rational house and accomodation purchasing decision. A lot will be caught on the wrong end – just like stock market has always been.
IS THE GOVERNMENT CONTROLLING THE MIGRATION INFLUX??? They could stop this vicious cycle of sudden inflation or deflation simply by granting PEPs instead of PRs. PEPs cannot buy into HDB resale market, or they won’t because their PEP may not last more than 2 years.
The housing crisis is Government created – THEY HAVE TO RESPONSIBLY RESOLVE IT BY CHANGING PRs into PEP but allowing merit application for citizenship for those qualified. That way we get rid of “floating population” but create stable population and allowing for effective planning of public housing needs.
IS THE GOVERNMENT PREPARED AND CAPABLE TO DO THIS?
I DOUBTED IT VERY MUCH – so this election is turning point for Singapore, I believe.
“IS THE GOVERNMENT CONTROLLING THE MIGRATION INFLUX??? They could stop this vicious cycle of sudden inflation or deflation simply by granting PEPs instead of PRs. PEPs cannot buy into HDB resale market, or they won’t because their PEP may not last more than 2 years.”
no can do. migrant workers are part of the family now as this is intended to add to the targeted population growth of 5.5 to even 8 million(remember, we are not reproducing enough to replace our own. furthermore, we are losing our own in the thousands yearly). when they descend, surely you don’t expect them to live in expensive private housing now do you? a large proportion of these foreign workers can only afford public housing – rental or resale and hence, the government continues to happily churn out hdbs.
the gov’s plan of a dynamic cosmopolitan and world leading city cannot succeed without them and therefore, your hdbs are our “bargaining chips” to retain their presence or services here or will it?
alternative,
“many people who are home CONSUMERS (as opposed to actual investors, please don’t lump them together cos there is really a difference)”
next time when you sell your property, remember to deposit your surplus proceed – after cost deduction – to my bank account.
observer on Wed, 2nd Dec 2009 7:59 pm
No, NO, No. My point is that the Government must NOT grant PRs but give only PEPs and bring in temporary foreign workers. Foreigner workers will stay in dormitory like now. PEPs on one-two year employment pass won’t be able to get banking loans so they CANNOT COMPETE with locals on the public housing sector.
Granting PRs inflate and deflate the boom-bust property cycle makes life very hard for local young couples and makes public housing planning impossible to achievable goals.
Dubai is a good example of massive foreign population BUT ONLY AS TEMPORARY RESIDENTS, NO PRs or very few.
We should adopt this route. Adding permanent population create insurmountable problems and chaos as we can see now in housing crisis, transport overload on MRT, access to public facilities and services and worse still demand on economic support if and when economy crashes again and this will happen from time to time.
It is the Government’s responsibility to control the influx of migrants via PRs route – THIS IS MY POINT OF CONTENTION. In fact I would argue that PRs now be converted to PEPs to restrict competitive pressure on public housing.
PEPs can rent anywhere they want or the Government could build dormitory for them as well just like foreign workers!
I AM SURE VOTER WILL LET THEIR SENTIMENTS MADE KNOWN IN THIS ELECTION TO COME.
observer on Wed, 2nd Dec 2009 8:13 pm
..”next time when you sell your property, remember to deposit your surplus proceed – after cost deduction – to my bank account.”
I just happen to glance this post of yours. It is an emotional outburst not related to reality.
Alternative is right. HDB is for own use – for personal consumption only as owner occupier with some renting now allowed under certain circumstances.
NOBODY IS ALLOWED TO BUY HDB FOR INVESTMENT SPECULATION. – you must know that.
You should debate rationally.
build dormitories where? they work in changi you build one in tuas? and how many dormitories can you build to house 3m or more fWs? you need to almost double the number of current housing to meet the demand and where do you find land to build these dormitory? next to thompson pte snobbish estate and have the landed property owners pelt you with rotten eggs? what about quality of dormitories to consider for different value workers? and would the return justify the costs for building these dormitories? and can you implement the changes now without causing CHAOS and the lists goes on and on….
not viable and not…rationale in land scarce sg
lastly, i don’t believe i have given the impression that i support speculation and unreasonable rise or fall in property prices.
a stable housing market that will serve a social cause is best for all and i maintain we are all investors or have a stake in this land if you like( we invest in each other).
I have to digress –
This “observer” sounds like someone from the fabled Internet Brigade or YPAP. Maybe he/she got frustrated trying to rebut to all our points. In all his/her responses, you can find official responses from the government and pro-government views. Never mind that the arguments may not be logical, just keep repeating and rehashing the government’s stand. Interesting…
@ observer on Wed, 2nd Dec 2009 11:22 pm”
…”not viable and not…rationale in land scarce sg”
CAN YOU EXPLAIN TO ALL YOUR SELF-CONTRADICTION OF THE ABOVE WITH THIS STATEMENT OF YOURS
migrant workers are part of the family now as this is intended to add to the targeted population growth of 5.5 to even 8 million
AT @observer on Wed, 2nd Dec 2009 7:59 pm
land scarce and want to increase the population to 8 million?
Since you cannot build even dormitory, where do you think Government build more HDB? Under your bed inside your bedroom? Or at Pedra Branca?
You are arguing in a circus just like a zoo animal.
Googler, you are right, “observer” really “sounds like someone from the fabled Internet Brigade or YPAP”. Or maybe someone with only excrement between his ear farting hot smell from from head on this blog.
I noted this cimpanzee “observer” is also debating irrationally with alternative. Reminded of this childish behaviour, this moronic character kept silent.
Let us leave at that – and recognise the impossibility of those chimpanzee who eats exrrements – their own and other chimps you find in a circus.
dear observer, (and i don’t really care what is YPAP or whatever, i’m just here to discuss these interesting issues.)
you said:
migrant workers … surely you don’t expect them to live in expensive private housing now do you? a large proportion of these foreign workers can only afford public housing – rental or resale and hence, the government continues to happily churn out hdbs.
i think the government has admitted already in their published numbers that they did not happily churn out hdbs for a long time already. they did not, however, explain to the people why they did not, or forgotten to, do that. it is very apparent now that a lot of people are very curious. and it can only do the government a whole lot of good during their next election campaigning to prepare their long list of justifications, if they manage to compile one, in order to placate public query.
or continue the current strategy – pretend there was no such public query, continue to distract, divert attention. oh look! dubai housing crisis! watch out! tallest building in the world collapsing upon us!
that strategy has worked brilliantly for the last 2-3 years – nobody questioned the failure to build housing at all. not one soul. immigration numbers were not censored – they were plain for all to see. building figures were not censored. as usual, they are just placed in obscure corners of the media. you’re not forbidden to see it. you just can’t find it sometimes.
scan through temasekreview’s last articles about property. it took them how many articles to realise this issue and even mention it? the process of misdirecting attention has succeeded brilliantly. but in the end, temasekreview found the numbers and published it. did someone ask for 2006 numbers? it’s somewhere out there …
i said:
“many people who are home CONSUMERS (as opposed to actual investors, please don’t lump them together cos there is really a difference)”
you said:
next time when you sell your property, remember to deposit your surplus proceed – after cost deduction – to my bank account.
i reply now, and please play along with me. it’s a very simple exercise that does not require great minds whether you’re YPAP, or small minds like myself from common folk.
i sell my house (but haven’t deposited money to your account yet, patience …)
next question is: where will i live?
simple right? waiting for your simple reply.
Hello alternative,
Quote:
i sell my house (but haven’t deposited money to your account yet, patience …)
next question is: where will i live?
Unquote
A certain eminent minister not long ago said senior citizens could consider living in JB… commuting to Singapore by car is quite convenient.
So there… I have helped “observer” answer your question… am I also entitled to your HDB sale proceeds?
Jokes aside, I heard of Malaysians working in Singapore doing exactly that.
thanks for your answer. would like to hear more answers. cos i’ve been asking this question to my friends and many people. most people don’t have an answer. most people haven’t even thought of it. and due to information diversion, most people didn’t even realise HDB prices went up 30+% in 3 years. even those who are planning to get married soon!
i was amazed. not at the ignorance of some of my friends, but at how information diversion can educate (or not educate) an entire population.
so let’s continue this little exercise – sell greatly-priced assets, take profit, then … what next?
i heard of people moving in with parents. for how long?
In singapore as in most nations,economic systems are still
operating on some form of the ancient “feudal system”.
take a simple illustration;who are the people that own large chunks of properties? you already know the answer.
who pay the ever increasing rentals?..you also Know the answer.
small businesses like your retail outlets mostly rent their premises from a ‘CAPTILAND’ or a ‘Far East Organisation’ and that rental is being charged at the end to the “innocent”
consumer.
Look at the farms in Philippines,for instance;those smaller
sized farmers have to sell to some kind of “landowners” on their terms and conditions.these landlords who paid pittance
for their purchases from the impoverished small farmers sell
them to other “poor” citizens at inflated prices like the price
we have to fork out for rice and sugar.
So,what is modern economics or globalisation…it’s all but one
big illusion performed and still being performed by greedy
“MAGICAINS”(BIG BUSINESS TYCOONS).
When yuou sell housing assets at a high price, the following are options:
Buy a smaller and/or cheaper place and move in.
Move in with parents.
Rent a place.
Move out of country.
take your pick.
@alternative on Fri, 4th Dec 2009 12:09 pm
“so let’s continue this little exercise – sell greatly-priced assets, take profit, then … what next?”
Take the money and emigrate.
You’ll need a big chunk of moola to do that though, either that or have a masters degree, not everyone is singapore ok so happy to just take and tan, devan or hairul ok
“so let’s continue this little exercise – sell greatly-priced assets, take profit, then … what next?”
Take the money and emigrate.
—
i know some people do that, but let’s discuss realistically, a lot of people don’t for many reasons (like family in singapore, or hate living in angmoh-land)
might you suggest another method? mr observer, any further input please?
more news out again:
“In Q3 this year, Singapore’s economic cycle reversed and GDP increased by 0.8 percent year-on-year. Prospects of an economic stability, combined with low borrowing costs, triggered the massive increase in home prices.”
again, no mention of how 300,000 new people came into the country but the country didn’t build many homes at that time.
—
how come? it’s not important? it’s not one of the main reasons? 300,000 can all go stay in Serangoon workers dorm? can meh? can ah?
“We do want to manage the property cycle as best we can, prevent boom and bust,” said Finance Minister Tharman Shanmugaratnam, admitting that it’s uneasy to foresee the property needs of the country. The government is reviewing the use of other measures to manage the home price cycle, such as modifying rules on credit, adjusting land supply and in extreme cases, amending the tax policies of the country.
—
wah, now even the FINANCE minister (not just the Nation’s Developers minister nor the Senior Minister Goh minister) says it is not easy to foresee the property needs. This is the best he/they can do. they didn’t know 300,000 people were coming in? Maybe Minister Wong also didn’t tell Minister Shanmug.
can we please chip in say $10 a person, that adds up to $32million (citizens can already. no need PRs to help us.) with this money, I ask that we increase the ministers pay. So that they can try their Best, Bester and Bestest. hopefully next year is a More Good Year.
Not Cheap Good Year please.
‘We do want to manage the property cycle as best we can, prevent boom and bust,’ said Mr Tharman.
umm.. so when the Boom already happened, then they want continue to prevent the Boom and Bust. so leave the already-happened Boom the way it is.
ok lah, i think they win liao.
i resign our people forever to requiring 30% of their income for 30 years to pay for their HDB flat in non-mature estate.
The End