Give us HDB flats AT COST, not 30 yrs Mortgage Enslavement!

[ChaoPappyPoodle]

The problem of expensive public housing as well as private housing can be corrected by taking bold measures and telling the banks the keep it cool. They will lose a few billions of dollars on existing mortgages but it wont ruin them.

We have a few hundred billions of dollars in reserves that no one has thought of to use effectively. Years ago, we were told that reserves were to be used to protect our currency. Then came Temasek and we were told that the investments were to be used to earn profits for the country.

But in the worse economic crisis in the modern world, the PApies spent a paltry sum on largely themselves, the largest employer in the country. The reserves have been used to prop up a monster of a company used to pay their cronies and themselves huge salaries.

We have to make better use of the reserves and to help a LARGE percentage of Singaporeans to have enough for their old age. This means returning to them what they overpaid.

With a kitty of $150billion, we can solve the housing prices issue as well as the problem of working Singaporeans not having enough for their old age.

When the PApies are voted out, we can privatise a number of GLCs and the shares from these GLCs can also be made part of the kitty to solve the problem.

We have anough reserves to solve the problems on housing and to take care of the finances for Singaporeans. Those that have overpaid should be returned what ever they overpaid. New housing to reflect costs of building.

Just do the math, it is feasible.







If we use

 

[Einfield]

Mr Goh,
A Noble idea, Modern day Robin Hood.

But how do we know if this idea is to score political points to gain support?

But when on is in power, will tell the people that this is not sustainable?

I support all opposition but at the same time, we don't want a Singapore style Chen Shi Bian.

 

[Goh Meng Seng]

It is definitely sustainable and this idea is not new at all.

Segmentation of housing market is practiced in Hong Kong. Hong Kong private property boom and bust is well known. But relatively unknown to Singaporeans is that Hong Kong government do sell cheap public flats to lower income group in Hong Kong. There is a cap on income and some rules on the sales of the flats.

Basically, the flats are sold at lowered land cost, which made a substantial component of total cost in Hong Kong. So only lower income buyers could buy it. They could sell it to another lower income buyer as it is but if the buyer is of middle income group, they must top up the land cost at the point of sales.

This is a demonstration of how segmented housing markets could work even in a place with high private property prices.

Goh Meng Seng

Mr Goh,
A Noble idea, Modern day Robin Hood.

But how do we know if this idea is to score political points to gain support?

But when on is in power, will tell the people that this is not sustainable?

I support all opposition but at the same time, we don't want a Singapore style Chen Shi Bian.

 

[Einfield]

But can they sell it with a profit like ours? I'm not supporting the way PAP profit from HDB but alternative ideas have to be study in details. We have to accept that there's no perfect policy.

 

[Glaringly]

Nice idea! Instead of selling back to low income group. I would like to take it further.

Let's say this is a new housing scheme that is only available to first time buyer that forms a certain percentage of new flats. So the impact to existing investment grade flat is minimal.

However, there are rules.

1. You can only sell back to HDB at pro-rated cost. ( base on 99 years )
2. You cannot rent or buy a re-sale HDB flat.
3. You may not buy a private house for investment.

I think this scheme would be excellant for poor income group. At least they would not have to slave all their money feeding the banks and HDB with long term interest.

 

[ChaoPappyPoodle]

Nice idea! Instead of selling back to low income group. I would like to take it further.

Let's say this is a new housing scheme that is only available to first time buyer that forms a certain percentage of new flats. So the impact to existing investment grade flat is minimal.

However, there are rules.

1. You can only sell back to HDB at pro-rated cost. ( base on 99 years )
2. You cannot rent or buy a re-sale HDB flat.
3. You may not buy a private house for investment.

I think this scheme would be excellant for poor income group. At least they would not have to slave all their money feeding the banks and HDB with long term interest.

What about the large percentage of Singaporeans who overpaid for their homes and don't have enough for their old age?

We have to return to these people whatever they overpaid. We have the reserves to do this.

For property, each person can only own ONE property, be it private or public property. This country is too small for property speculation. Those with more than one property will be given time to sell off the excess properties whihc will be overseen by a garment agency to ensure that there isn't a property glut.

Do not underestimate the horrors that the PApy have created for a large percentage of teh population. YOu can't just tackle new homes and disregard the older generation including those in the 30s and 40s.

USe the bloody reserves! IF we are in a serious economic, crisis that means the entire world is also in a crisis. All teh money in the world may not buy you anything at that point in time. All the investments in stocks and bonds will be worthless to cash out. In short, you're screwed.

We need some reserves but we do have too much which is being used by the PAPies to enrich themselves and their cronies.

You have to throw away any thoughts that the PAP and teh 154th has put inside your head. They have created a huge burden for the country but it can be solved with out of te box thinking and to use the reserves to solve economic and socio-economic issues.

In Singapore, you can't talk about housing for the masses without also providing a solutin for old age because the PAPies have ruined the old age funds of at least two generations, with a third on the way towards ruin.

You can't say, you can help the new home owners but disregard a larger percentage of home owners and have no solution to helping them to afford their old age.

 

[Ramseth]

The answer is obvious, ain't it? What is buying HDB flat? It's buying a 99-year lease. What's paying mortgage? It's commuting 99 years worth of rental into 30 years payment period. Why would any sane person do that? Because HDB cuts down rental eligibility until almost no one qualifies for it. Why did HDB do that? Because it's profitable and justifies the astronomical pays of ministers and senior servants, and helps their friends who are property developers to peg private property prices upward.

 

[ChaoPappyPoodle]

The answer is obvious, ain't it? What is buying HDB flat? It's buying a 99-year lease. What's paying mortgage? It's commuting 99 years worth of rental into 30 years payment period. Why would any sane person do that? Because HDB cuts down rental eligibility until almost no one qualifies for it. Why did HDB do that? Because it's profitable and justifies the astronomical pays of ministers and senior servants, and helps their friends who are property developers to peg private property prices upward.

That's a symptom nd not te cause of the problem. The cause is a fascist political party in power for too long. Other major symptoms are the a large percentage of home owners do not, will not have sufficient funds for tehir old age.

With more FTs coming in, as promised by the PAPies, we can expect close to 500,000 new FTs during the PAPies' tenure should the PAPies win the next election.

This will shoot up housing prices again. JObs will be even harder to come by for Singaporeans.

A garment that cannot provide for housing and a socio-economic climate that allows for sufficient jobs for its own people and sufficient funds for pensioners should not be allowd to govern. It's as simple as that.

Vote the PAPies out because they have failed miserably at the most basic level of governance.

 

[Papsmearer]

what would selling the flats at cost achieve?

affordable housing, unless u like to pay $400K for an entry level flat.

 

[Goh Meng Seng]

But can they sell it with a profit like ours? I'm not supporting the way PAP profit from HDB but alternative ideas have to be study in details. We have to accept that there's no perfect policy.

Einfield,

That is the problem with many Singaporeans. They must realize that HDB is BASIC housing for all, not for speculative nor even "investment" for profits.

It is a zero sum game. If you want to profit from your flat, someone must be the suckers. Who? Your future generations.

In Hong Kong's case, yes, they could still "profit" from the sales of their flat if the market is over speculative. But the fundamental question is, where are they going to stay if they do that?

Goh Meng Seng

 

[Papsmearer]

The market is segmented and such substitution effect is contained both by policy means. It could further be enhanced in the segmentation that only certain first time buyer below certain age (i.e. young couples) could enjoy this pricing. Upgraders and such will not enjoy such prices.

As I have said, Singapore's HDB flat system is unique whereby the government is the monopoly of supply for new flats in which it could set the rules on who it could sell to.

Any notable effect on resale or private market will be one time off. There will always be a demand on these markets. Besides, if this is really about HDB as a home for Singaporeans, not some speculative tool, it will be effective even if the resale market collapse. If the resale market collapse, speculators' effort to buy into HDB will be in vain.


Goh Meng Seng

U cannot segment this type of benefits for certain buyers. if you give this to young buyers like in your example, u would have alienated the rest of the population who paid 2 or 3 times more for their flats. Every group segment has a justifiable claim to cheap housing. Not so young buyers with family and kids trying to make ends meet would sure like to get a cheap flat. What about retirees or people in their late 50s and 60s who have contributed to the success of singapore, don't they deserve a cheap flat in their twilight years? What about single men who have served 2 years of NS, don't they deserve a cheap flat? When u implement this type of policy, u are committing political suicide.

Your so call one time off notable effect has another name. Its called real estate meltdown. When it melts down, the regular sinkies are going to suffer. Speculators account for a small portion of the property ownership. really hit hard will be regular joes.

 

[Goh Meng Seng]

U cannot segment this type of benefits for certain buyers. if you give this to young buyers like in your example, u would have alienated the rest of the population who paid 2 or 3 times more for their flats. Every group segment has a justifiable claim to cheap housing. Not so young buyers with family and kids trying to make ends meet would sure like to get a cheap flat. What about retirees or people in their late 50s and 60s who have contributed to the success of singapore, don't they deserve a cheap flat in their twilight years? What about single men who have served 2 years of NS, don't they deserve a cheap flat? When u implement this type of policy, u are committing political suicide.

Your so call one time off notable effect has another name. Its called real estate meltdown. When it melts down, the regular sinkies are going to suffer. Speculators account for a small portion of the property ownership. really hit hard will be regular joes.

The first generation of Singaporeans have benefited tremendously from the REAL SUBSIDIZED flats, anyone make noise about that?

PUBLIC HOUSING POLICY is for basic housing needs. You will have to settle the problems of basic housing for all.

If you do not solve this problem for younger generations of couples, they will marry late and the aging population problem will aggravate. Especially so if the housing problem extended the problem to retirement financing. The whole chain of problems will come in later on.

We should not be populist and try to satisfy everybody. Let's be more far sighted. We need to address the housing problem for future generations to come. Our generations have suffered under the present system and do we need to drag our future generations into it as well?

Goh Meng Seng

 

[Goh Meng Seng]

By the way, the first hdb flat market is already segmented. Household income less than $8k, family unit, you can only get HDB loans two times... etc.

There is nothing new to this one.

Goh Meng Seng

U cannot segment this type of benefits for certain buyers. if you give this to young buyers like in your example, u would have alienated the rest of the population who paid 2 or 3 times more for their flats. Every group segment has a justifiable claim to cheap housing. Not so young buyers with family and kids trying to make ends meet would sure like to get a cheap flat. What about retirees or people in their late 50s and 60s who have contributed to the success of singapore, don't they deserve a cheap flat in their twilight years? What about single men who have served 2 years of NS, don't they deserve a cheap flat? When u implement this type of policy, u are committing political suicide.

Your so call one time off notable effect has another name. Its called real estate meltdown. When it melts down, the regular sinkies are going to suffer. Speculators account for a small portion of the property ownership. really hit hard will be regular joes.

 

[Papsmearer]

Private property markets have survived in the past with real subsidized HDB flats sold. They are segmented markets here in Singapore's context.

That was a different time and circumstance. Private property in those days was constructed on land that the HDB sold at a reasonable price. Its a whole new ball game now. What happened in the states could not have happened 30 years ago.

Most Singaporeans having HDB flats are for long term home, not investment. This is why resale market keeps going up because supply of HDB flats in resale market is limited due to this fact.

The resale market price goes up not for the reasons u have stated. It has gone up because the HDB has artificially inflated the prices for new flats to first time entry level buyers. when the new flat prices go up, u cannot expect someone to part with his resale flat in a better and more convenient location for less money, do you?

The impact on resale market is only one way, when there isn't enough supply of new flats or the price differential between resale markets and new flat markets are very thin. It means that those first time buyer who can buy new flats could buy into resale market but not vice verse. Thus no matter how attractive the new flats are priced, those who are limited to resale market could not possibly cross over.

This system serves to achieve two things. It serves to even out the cross generations wealth inequality. The problem with present system is that those first or even second generations might have enjoyed real asset enhancement but not the younger generations. Secondly, it curbs speculative attacks due to excess liquidity caused by foreign inflows.

The generational wealth inequality is not the fault of the older generation. they did not buy their flats 30 years ago expecting it to be worth so much now. the PAP and the HDB created it. Unless u are a communist, there reason to "even" this out. they earn it, and they should keep it. The HDB, PAP and u have yet to provethat foreign inflows is causing excessive liquidity. I don't see it. What are u basing this on?

While I know many Singaporeans like the false feeling of "high price" of their flats but the truth is, you could only possibly own one HDB flats and if you sell it, you will have no where to stay. You sell high, you buy high. It is totally a false sense of well being. Unless you are upgrading to Private property or cashing out for some reasons, majority of Singaporeans are not holding HDB flats just to see how much they could sell.


Goh Meng Seng

Your aim is noble, but the methodology is way off.

 

[kingrant]

GMS's idea is good but as pointed out by Papsmearer and Ramseth, not practical. It will create a lot more upheaval and disruption than solution.

The PAP has boxed itslef into a corner which is spiralling upwards. Maybe the solution is not in the HDB pricing policies, but in revising our wages upwards aggressively over the next 5 years, to keep up with the asset inflation.

That, and good jobs for Singaporeans where high pay is sustenable, should be the PAP govt's holy grail, something which they have been negligent to do for the past 15 years.

 

[shOUTloud]

Go back to costs? Are you crazy? Do you even understand the extent of the costs involved?

It is not as simple as keeping it to costs and maintaining it. What will happen 5 or 10 years later when the government makes an u-turn on this drastic policy that you mention?

"Asset inflation" is a myth that the PAP govt fed Singaporeans and now the myth is being exposed for what it is.

The only way out for Mah now is to flood the market with new flats to absorb the demand and hope for prices to start deflating to a manageable level. Back to maybe 15-20 years' mortgage.

Your suggestion is too drastic and will be the final straw to get Singaporeans on the streets.

 

[Zombie]

U cannot segment this type of benefits for certain buyers.

HDB will have to build "slum" districts for cheap flats, since nobody will want their premium flats to be devalued by nearby cheap flats. People will be more divided.

 

[Goh Meng Seng]

Compare to the whole market, the new flat market is just a small portion, less than 1%. I do not think that it will have such impact.

Goh Meng Seng

Go back to costs? Are you crazy? Do you even understand the extent of the costs involved?

It is not as simple as keeping it to costs and maintaining it. What will happen 5 or 10 years later when the government makes an u-turn on this drastic policy that you mention?

"Asset inflation" is a myth that the PAP govt fed Singaporeans and now the myth is being exposed for what it is.

The only way out for Mah now is to flood the market with new flats to absorb the demand and hope for prices to start deflating to a manageable level. Back to maybe 15-20 years' mortgage.

Your suggestion is too drastic and will be the final straw to get Singaporeans on the streets.

 

[longbow]

HK low cost flats are few in number (not like 80% of pop), ARE heavily subsidized and resale is only for buyers in the low income ranges. HK is a poor example to use.

What would be better would be to peg price increases of new flats to inflation and at the same time boost productivity and pay for Singaporeans thereby increasing affordability. If HDB prices increase by 3% but PAP is able to boost pay by 6% a year that would, significantly increase affordability of the flats.

Again with 90% being prop owners they WILL not want to see they assets come down in price. What you are proposing is political suicide.

It is definitely sustainable and this idea is not new at all.

Segmentation of housing market is practiced in Hong Kong. Hong Kong private property boom and bust is well known. But relatively unknown to Singaporeans is that Hong Kong government do sell cheap public flats to lower income group in Hong Kong. There is a cap on income and some rules on the sales of the flats.

Basically, the flats are sold at lowered land cost, which made a substantial component of total cost in Hong Kong. So only lower income buyers could buy it. They could sell it to another lower income buyer as it is but if the buyer is of middle income group, they must top up the land cost at the point of sales.

This is a demonstration of how segmented housing markets could work even in a place with high private property prices.

Goh Meng Seng

 

[Ramseth]

Mah Bow Tan: When you bought your flat?

Voter: 2005.

MBT: How much you paid for it?

Voter: $200k.

MBT: What's the valuation now?

Voter: $300k.

MBT: And you want to vote for that Goh Meng Seng who promises to bring your home value down to $100k or less?

Voter: :(