4/24/2006
two picks of the hdb cherry
I just read an article in the New Paper about the plight of a divorced woman and her three grown up children. She had owned two HDB flats and sold them for a profit and now squatting in her mother's one room rental flat.
She is not allowed to buy another subsidised HDB flat, which is obvious. Everyone knows about this rule. But then it was reported that she could not even buy a resale HDB flat where the element of subsidy is no longer an issue. And she cannot squat in her mother's place because she is taking advantage of the system. Her income does not qualify her for a rental flat, so cannot also squat in another rental flat belonging to her mother.
Now what's the issue?
There were two reasons given for why she is not allowed to buy a resale HDB flat. One is because of her previous ownership of two HDB flats. The other is that her income is not sufficient for her to buy/afford one.
Now, which is the real reason? Her unsound financial position or her ownership of HDB flats? If it is the latter it is very puzzling. When buying a resale flat, there is no issue of subsidy. Why then can't a citizen buy and sell a resale flat as often as he needs to? I thought the two cherry principle applies to only subsidised flats.
But if this is true, then many HDB flat owners will only be allowed to live in two HDB flats in their life time, resale or subsidised. But if it is the reason of financing, she has 3 children, and their combined income may be sufficient to buy a smaller 2 room flats. From her sales of two HDB flats and with profits, the CPF part of the proceeds must have gone back to CPF with interests. Strange that this is still not enough for a small HDB flat.
Then the issue of squatting with her mother in a rental flat. And because of that she is deemed to deprive others of the privilege of a rental flat. How? I am still scratching my head. Why can't daughter and grandchildren squeezed into the mother's flat if they are prepared for the inconvenience? Fostering familial ties, living together in a 3 tier family?
The biggest puzzle or problem, cannot buy HDB flat, insufficient income. Cannot stay in rental flat of mother, not registered as a tenant and income not eligible to rent another flat. With all the disqualifications, nowhere else to go. They are now allowed to squat with the mother temporarily and must vacate soon.
This is the efficient application and administration of rules in Singapore. All the rules and regulations covered. Now the problem is with her. It is a private problem and not the problem of HDB.
And the paper asked the question, 'Did she created her own problem?' Even if she did, so, throw her into the streets?
Would anyone want to offer her a solution? How could she beat the system and get a roof over her head, and her children's head?
vote for singapore
who ever goes to vote, if he/she thinks in terms of what is good for singapore, i think they should be the correct guideline to decide how to vote.
vote for the well being of singapore, which is like voting for yourself. what is good for singapore must be good for the people.
make it a habit and it will become normal
Anything that we do, if we do it often enough, it becomes a habit, it becomes second nature to us. And by then we would not know what's the difference or how we get to have such habits.
Just observe the disorganised and messy desk in an office. It all started clean and tidy. But if left on its own, the messiness becomes natural and acceptable. Look at some of the construction workers in the mrt. After a hard sweating day of work, they will plonk into the train, all sweat and smell. But they would not know that they were smelling. Only the non smelly one will know.
A drug addict, after a few more doses and sessions, will not see anything wrong with their habits. So, just get use to it.
It also applies to spending habit. If one is earning $1k a month, one soon get use to it and live a $1k lifestyle. One who earns $10k will live a $10k lifestyle. Spending on a $100 lunch is normal. Nothing excessive. Nothing extravagant or sinful. And look at those high flyers in New York with an annual income of $100mil. To them there is nothing wrong. They deserve it. And give them another $100 mil, they will just put in into their pockets. It becomes normal or second habit to pocket that kind of money.
When it becomes second habit, how can it be wrong? Nay, it is wrong to earn $1k a month. Never wrong to earn $1 mil a month.
resign if failed to turn up for parliament
Opposition Leader Lim Kit Siang (DAP-Ipoh Timur) says Rafidah Abdul Aziz should be removed as the international trade and industry minister if she remains stubborn and refuses to attend Parliament on behalf of her ministry.
"In the 21 days of sitting, she has only attended Parliament twice - the official opening of the session.. and the tabling of the 9th Malaysia Plan by the prime minister," he added in a statement issued in Parliament last week.
A little extract from littlespeck.com
Talking about Malaysia should be more interesting. Lim Kit Siang tabling a motion to fire Rafidah for not attending parliament session. That is how serious he viewed this as a duty of all politicians. These are people's representatives and elected by the people to represent them. How can they play truant and spend time on other personal matters or their own businesses? If they think representing the people in parliament is not important, then they better resigned. But Kit Siang probably did not know what is happening or going to happen. Maybe Rafidah has already been given the marching order and there is no point for her to be present anymore.
it is always good to talk and listen
throwing challenges, pushing your opponents, punching and breaking jaws, biting ears, etc are often encountered in a contest. at the end of it people regretted what they did. some pretend to regret though.
but it is so refreshing to hear nice words being said about your opponents. a bit of levelling down to see eye to eye instead of shouting down from heaven. looking down from that level, everything is so imperfect.
no wonder some schools did not want to play ball with neighbourhood schools. yeah, i am talking about schools and sports.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)