2013 New Year Day’s Message to PM

Dear PM,

Thank you for taking the time to wish us Happy New Year Day’s via your NYD Message 2013. We understand that you are definitely busy with many initiatives and priorities such as the National Conversation, Budget 2013, Population Paper etc that you have not been able to decide on a by-election date for Punggol East SMC.

I read through the NYD Message 2013 and would like to add a heavy dose of reality and cynicism to the sugar coated over-optimism. Singapore has not made steady progress in 2012, instead the pain associated with a variety of breakdowns in the public transport system, SMRT bus driver strikes, escalating inflation (COEs, housing, daily necessities), over-crowding and continued foreigner “invasion” has made 2012 even worst for Singaporeans.

Tackling the specific points of the NYD 2013 message, the Singapore Conversion has been touted as the Silver Bullet to solve many of our problems and to engage Singaporeans to focus on their futures. The Main Stream Media has no doubt published many photos and videos of Singaporeans involved and enthusiastic about the Singapore Conversation. However, the enlightened ones have already dismissed the whole exercise as a pathetic wayang show ever since the netizens have identified numerous grassroots and PAP associated helpers in the televised debate. I continue to encourage my fellow enlightened Singaporeans to keep up their skepticism and instead insist on taking control of their own destinies by enacting change via the ballot box. It seems that is the only way we are heard.

On the population, the NYD 2013 message has step-sided the key point which Singaporeans have been shouting but never adopted. Singaporeans want to make sure that the guiding principle is “Singaporeans First and Foremost”.  There keeps on being this call and nag that we need to be inclusive of the new arrivals and share Singapore values regardless about where they originally came from. The question is how about all the Singaporeans that did National Service and lived in Hougang ? They had the true Singapore values but were always made to feel like second-class citizens via lack of upgrading and improvements to their estates. Are these Singaporeans worth less than the new arrivals? In my mind, the White Paper on the Population due out will undoubtly remain as a continued propaganda of needing to import foreigners (and if they are rich even better) into Singapore and lead to over-population of 6.5 million people in this crowded little island. What would not been explicated stated would also be the welcoming of rich foreign millionaires who buy their way into Singapore and inflate everything from cars to housing prices. Cases in point are COEs of over S$ 81,000 for 1,600cc and the ECs penthouses being sold for S$ 2.05 million. The imbued objective being, if you are not rich and cannot afford to stay or procreate in Singapore, you are welcomed to leave, even though you were born, raised and contributed to this country.

It is indeed ironic that the NYD 2013 message has also brought the issue on embracing the right values. When Yaw Shin Loong was implicated on his extra-martial affair, the full weight of the lynching party came down on him and requested that he come clean and that he had let down the voters in Hougang. When the same incident happened to Michael Palmer, the PR machinery was flawless in painting him in a good light and requested that he be given space and time to set things right. Double-standards don’t feature well in upholding right values, do they?

This issue on values also leads to another point of discussion, the claim that no system is perfect and that there will always been cracks. Perhaps then we should consider paying people in Public Sector senior positions and political leaders a lot less and not pegged their salaries to the private sector. This scheme may assure that they are joining to uphold the ethos of public service and not to uphold their lavish lifestyles. If Michael Palmer was paid only the median of the Singapore population salary, then maybe he would not be able to afford the expensive Monday-night rendezvous in Fairmount hotel or given to Laura Ong the expensive Dior handbag? Maybe he would focus on making ends meet like the rest of us and still be the MP for Punggol East SMC ?

The true values of the first generation leaders have seemed to be eroded over the years. When the odds were against them with the British departure, being kicked out of Malaysia, needing to provide affordable housing and good jobs to Singaporeans, the first generation leaders were fearless, innovative, self-sacrificing and focused on improving Singaporean lives. Interestingly, these values seemed to be demonstrated by the more credible opposition party members, who have everything to lose and nothing to gain if their political careers fail.  

This reflective response to the NYD 2013 message is intended to be a reality check on the year 2013 and beyond. The NYD 2013 message may have intended to be uplifting but Singaporeans have their eyes wide opened and now live by the creed, “Fool me once, Shame on you. Fool me twice, Shame on me.”

Question ? Why is Public Transport not under the purview of Public Servants?

See the last line in the report from MSM, I don't buy the argument that if the Public Transport System is nationalized it will result in a worse-off condition. Things are already so BAD, that it can only get better if it is nationalized.

The Public Utilities Board is a Stat Board under Public Servants. So does it mean that it is inefficient and that we do not get our water supply? The last I checked, I had water to bathe in...
The Public Libraries in Bukit Batok, Bedok, Toa Payoh etc are under Public Servants and we have iPads available for loan now! We have up-to-date books and newspapers... Without competition from another alternative, the Public Libraries are doing fine...

When you screw up, say you screw up lah, and correct the problem by taking the right steps to Nationalize SMRT and SBS Transit. 

From ChannelNewsAsia :-
SINGAPORE: Industry observers say transport operators should look at alternative ways to raise the salaries of bus drivers.

Passing the buck to commuters should be the last resort, say observers.

They are commenting on Transport Minister Lui Tuck Yew's suggestion that bus fares may go up in future to help improve the wages of bus drivers and that the public transport fare review, due next year, will consider this issue.

It's not easy getting Singaporeans to come on board as bus drivers.

So salary increments might make the job more appealing.

The question is: who will foot the bill?

Some industry observers said it should not be assumed that commuters will have to bear the additional costs as the two public transport operators remain profitable.

"So, from the passengers' side and the general public point of view, it may be difficult for them to swallow," said Professor Lee Der-Horng, an associate professor at the Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, National University of Singapore (NUS).

"...if they can first of all pursue their internal resources and try to improve their operations and see if they can further cut down operating costs, then perhaps, it wouldn't be necessary to approach the public and seek an increase in public transportation fare."

MP Gan Thiam Poh, who is also a member of the Government Parliamentary Committee (GPC) for Transport, said: "I feel strongly that the operators should try to explore or exhaust other means, such as other revenue, such as revenue coming from advertisements, rental or whatever...I think passing on (the costs) to consumer, that should be the last resort."

But even if salaries for bus drivers are raised, it might not be enough to get Singaporeans to bite.

Industry observers say that the long hours, rigorous work and the desire to have a job of higher value are among the main reasons Singaporeans shun the job.

Hence, a dependency on foreign manpower in this area might become unavoidable.

According to the chairman of the Public Transport Council, Gerard Ee, Singapore also lacks the body count and has an ageing workforce. That is why it must look to foreign manpower to fill the gaps in certain essential industries.

"Some jobs are just not popular, and as long as people have choices, they will give it a miss," said Mr Ee.

Industry observers also suggested that the operators look beyond Malaysia and China when hiring bus drivers, "so we will not be overly-reliant on a particular country or a particular region", said NUS' Professor Lee.

Suggestions to nationalise public transport have been raised but some observers said that this could result in inefficiencies and a drop in service levels ????!!!!

Residential projects due for completion next year are 2-3x more than usual.

Residential projects due for completion next year are 2-3x more than usual.

http://sbr.com.sg/residential-property/news/fears-higher-vacancy-rates-escalate

"We retain our negative view on the Singapore residential sector as we continue to see a rising threat of vacancy with an acceleration in physical completions in 2013-15," said CIMB in a report.
Vacancy rates for non-landed private units had increased from 5.9% to 6.1% qoq in 3Q12 as take-up continued to lag physical completions.
URA estimates that completions will rise from 16.1k units in 2013 to 23.1k units in 2015, which according to CIMB is 2-3x more than the historical average occupancy rate of 8k units per year.
"This will be compounded by impending completions of HDB units following aggressive building in the last three years. Around 83% of local residents still live in HDB flats. Incremental demand should also come under pressure from the Singapore government’s continuous reassessment of its liberal immigration
policies. PR conversions have tapered off, a glimpse of how tighter immigration is taking shape. Rising inventories against normalised population growth do not augur well for future take-up, in our view. While prices remain at record highs on low interest rates, policy risks remain an overhang," it said.

Even LHL admits that there is a property bubble. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-11-28/singapore-s-lee-says-population-property-among-challenges-faced.html

“It is certainly something on Singaporeans’ minds. We have had a property boom, almost a bubble. It’s because liquidity is sloshing around worldwide and real interest rates are negative. People are looking for opportunities to invest their money and there aren’t a lot of exciting opportunities where you see growth and possible new breakthroughs right now."

Then why housing prices still increasing? Something is seriously wrong.....

Dun be conned by the BULLSHIT from Main Stream Media!

There recently has been a lot of news in the Main Stream Media that employers are complaining that they do not have enought workers due to the foreign worker ratios.

http://www.asiaone.com/News/Latest%2BNews/Singapore/Story/A1Story20121105-381524.html

http://www.soshiok.com/multimedia/photos/1618

To me it is all BULL SHIT ! The powers at hand are already using the main stream media to sell the fact that they need more foreigners in order for businesses to survive...So that they can import more to make your lifes more difficult...

Let me ask you whether the flood of foreigner have declined? NO! Only the pace of increase has decreased. They are still coming in droves and businesses are just drunk with cheap foreign workers that take up space and limited resources in Singapore. See attached website http://nathanielkoh.blogspot.com/2012_07_01_archive.html and tables

Say NO to BULL SHIT from businesses who should not be in Singapore in the first place if they do not want to hire Singaporeans!

Top Ten Signs you are a "Gangnam Style" Fanatic

Top Ten Signs you are a "Gangnam Style" Fanatic

No. 1 - You walk across all pedestrain crossings with the trademark horse-riding dance

No. 2 - The only clothes in your collection are suits with untied bow ties, and of course dark sunglasses

No.3 - You had plastic surgery to look fat and round like PSY, oops sorry, you just pigged out to get to the right size.

No.4 - All your mobile ring tones, alarm bell and door bell are the Gangnam Style song.

No.5 - You are responsible for at least 1% of the 580,000 million clicks on YouTube for the music video

No.6 - You have named your recently born dragon baby "Gangnam Long"

No. 7 - You can sing the song in the four official languages in Singapore. You are working on the Japanese and Thai versions now.

No. 8 - You hail taxis by doing the trademark lasso dance.

No. 9 -  You made so many failed parodies of the song that no one wants to dance it anymore with you.

No. 10 - You go up to the MacDonald's counter to order and start by saying to the 50+ year old Aunties, "Hey Sexy Lady...oh oh oh oh..."

First Hand Acccount : Population Dialogue Session with Ministers

POPULATION DIALOGUE SESSION WITH MINISTERS

I was there at the dialogue session, it was so well orchestrated that it felt like a multi-level marketing "sales" event. It started with DPM Teo giving the presentation on fertility rates, immigration numbers etc and reinforced that immigration is needed to fill in the missing babies since 1980s. Charts, numbers and graphs were all used to appeal to the head to assure that infrastructure was being upgraded, immigration was calibrated etc. There was also an innovative use of an instant survey to ask a couple of questions.

Kicking off the questions was Dr Amy Khor with whether the two child policy was so successful to cause the problems today. It was textbook answer of that the policy was needed at that time etc etc and they changed it in 1987. Then came the questions fast and furious. Out of the 35 questions I estimated, about one or two thanked the government, the majority about twenty questions were harsh and upset with the government, the rest were relatively neutral. The quality of some of the questions were quite weak, either unprepared or too narrow in focus. But some were thought provoking and related, e.g. Would Singapore return to Malaysia in the future if we did not have enough Singaporeans ? Why are PRs allowed unlimited time to decide if they want to be Singaporeans or not? Why still have landed properties if there is so constrained land in Singapore? Make it non existent for everyone. Why are we still selling our property to foreigners and the highest bidders when there is such a crunch ? Now the urban planning says 6 million in Singapore, but similarly in the past, Singapore was designed for 4 million, now we have 5.3 million. Who will know if the government screw up again and increase it to 8 million ? Would the government be ready to accept non traditional families like lesbians and single moms ?

The mood was definitely not kind to the Ministers. Whenever someone said something supporting Singaporeans, the audience would clap and cheer. One young Singaporean even addressed Dr Amy Khor's clarification that he was okay with 10 million in Singapore, he quipped,"I am okay with 10 million in Singapore with the appropriate infrastructure, ten million SINGAPORE citizens!" to loud applause. Another guy at the end of his question even said," I will be more comfortable with a Singaporean lesbian and her kid, then a foreigner!" The final blow was from a small business owner that even chided the Ministers Grace Fu and Tan Jin Chuan calling them managers rather than leaders and not having conviction to set a path forward or vision (Grace Fu on non traditional families) and unsure what economic growth is for Singapore (Tan Jin Chuan, which led him to return with a lengthly merry ground defense of himself)
So much so that DPM Teo had to admit that we are so used to scoring 99 percent that when we score 75 percent we get upset.

To be fair, I have to give credit to the Ministers and organizers for staying an extra hour till 10.30pm to try to address all the questions. I think some of the audience members should reflect how they wasted their opportunity to ask in-depth questions. Only two suggestions were picked up, one possible re-zone of the land use to increase land for housing and a special needs person as an NMP in the future.

From my perspective, the most disturbing was the wrap up by DPM Teo, he asked three questions, where Singapore wants to be in the future? What is the definition of a Singaporean ? And how these two questions affect the population in Singapore. For the first question, he painted an appealing vision that now 50 percent of the world's population lives in urban cities, and the future even more will live in cities, and that Singapore wants to be one of the key global cities in the world - vibrant and dynamic and cosmopolitan. The answer to the second questions is that the Singapore identity is always in flux and we are a migrant society. Everyone of us have some relative or parent or grandparents that were immigrants to Singapore. And the third question, was the text book answer that we needed a core of Singaporeans with the values and mores for society but we need to continue to supplement with young dynamic immigrants who provide the economic drive and the foreigners will return home and not be a burden to our society. All of these questions and their answers are logical and true, but it begs the question....

IS THE SURVIVAL OF SINGAPORE OR THE SURVIVAL OF SINGAPOREANS ? The key focus for our existing government ?

I pondered on this question as I took the Somerset MRT train north bound to the suburbs at 10.50pm after the dialogue session and found the train packed including a group of merry Americans, a loving Filipino couple and a Malaysian watching Ipoh parody of Gangnam style.

Then I realized the message I got from the dialogue session and the path our current leaders are taking us down, and the sad reality being, "Singaporeans are essentially migrants helping the survival of Singapore for the next batch of migrants."

Property News : I was correct !!!!!

On 5th October, Friday, the Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) announced that it was capping the length of a home loan at 35 years.

With effect from 6th October, 2012:

1. All residential property loans will be subjected to a maximum of 35 years loan tenure, including HDB mortgage loan tenures.

2. Tighter rules will apply to borrowers taking loans longer than 30 years, or who want to have their loan periods extend beyond the retirement age of 65.

3. If they already have an existing mortgage and want to take another one that require these tighter rules for another property, the cash down payment is 60 per cent, instead of the current 40 per cent.

4. Same rules apply for refinancing loans.

5. Non-individual borrowers now subject to 40% loan limit (down from 50%)

See my blog post on 24 Sept 2012 http://www.youarebetteroffted.blogspot.com/2012/09/will-singapore-follow-hong-kong-to-cap.html urging the MND minister to impose similar measures, looks like MAS did it.

Not drastic measures, but in the right direction, a correction in the property prices is needed to ensure that the increase in property prices over the years do not outgrow the increase in real wages!!!