A lot of you have this misconception that when all that was said, I KPKB. Not true. My only real gripe with HDB was that the family unit is focused on the father(at that time at least. need to check if it's been updated). Even if my mother were alive at that time, even though I'm a citizen, they would only focus on the father when considering the family unit. It's a very strange rule to me, considering that we'd be living together as one family unit no matter what. Otherwise, no issues lor. The lack of grants for PR-only families is a non-issue to me. It's only when you have cases like this(again, a lot. Malaysian parents, Singaporean kids, etc etc etc) where I personally believe there should be some flexibility for the local kids. Heck, HDB could afford to be a lot more flexible in a lot of things for locals, we can all agree on that. But end of the day, most of us just pay more and tahan lor. This article, about me "defending" PRs, was about what happened during the National Conversation on Housing. Some people brought up how PRs have it so good and practically all the benefits with no costs, so I just told them about the differentiations that do exist, the extent of the differentiations, the time those differentiations start(from young) and how uncertain retaining PR status is. The headlines is, as ever, spin. My main point, backed up by figures others had already floated prior, is that PRs as the minority of the market cannot be blamed for driving the market, not completely. Someone has to be selling to the PRs, for one. Also, inflation here and globally, increased amenities, land prices, the lack of transparency regarding land prices, the fact that when they price the flat they are also including the amenities built with the estate, as opposed to that being municipal costs...so many factors.
