Property bubble is good

Justin Chiu of Cheung Kong Property lives by the religion that property bubble is good. It has to be. High property prices mean big profits for his company and big bonuses for him. Every property developer must live by this religion, or they should not be in the property business. They are in to make money, big money. They are not in a charity business. Sorry, I think I must qualify this. Some charity businesses are also very happy with big bonuses. No one should demand that property developers build properties and sell at a loss or at subsidized profits. That is fundamentally wrong. They must make the most profits they could from their projects. They must sell at market price, as high as the market can afford. It is not their responsibility to make sure that properties are affordable and reasonable. That is the job of the govt. The govt is responsible to the people and has a moral duty, a social contract, to house the people in decent homes, not in dog’s kennel. The roles of the govt and property developers are different. It only becomes a problem when a govt thinks it is a property developer, to max profits and a property developer thinks it is the govt and sells property at a loss. But in a world when the lines are blurred, when confusions set in, when the govt is not the govt, when the developer is not the developer, the people will become collateral damages in a greedy game of profits.

Going ahead with the Water Festival?

We respect the foreigners here. So we are going to celebrate their Water Festival. Do we respect other foreigners and celebrate their festivals as well? If we don't, does it mean that we are not respecting them? What if we celebrate some and don't celebrate some? Would those affected feel slighted and not respected? What if we celebrate this year because it is the in thing and don't celebrate in the following year or years? Would the foreigners say we have stop respecting them?

Calling a spade a spade!

Finally someone with the guts to stand up and tell the truth that everyone pretends not to see. It is govt intervention in the property market that caused high prices in property, not market forces. Simon Cheong, President of Redas, 'argued that the Govt's land sales programme has, in some instances, in fact accentuated the mismatch between demand and supply and contributed to higher pricing....His candid comments - which he said he had been "advised" against making, "for fear of it being a sensitive topic" - found resonance among some industry watchers, while others still argued for the State's role in curbing market volatility.' For someone in his position to take such a stand is a sign that he could not take the nonsenses anymore. The lip had blown off. He has to tell it as it is. Let's see if any more professionals have any balls in between their legs to repeat his stand publicly. Simon quoted the case of a plot in Tampines with a bid of $118 psf but rejected and now sold to a top bid of $421 psf and the Ten Mile Junction which failed at $162 psf and now sold at $437 psf. How not for property prices to go up? But it is wrong to say that the govt interfered with property prices. The govt only manages the property market to ensure that HDB prices can only go up. And that is an election position. Vote for the govt to protect the value of HDB flats. So, with a little management of land sales and building of new flats, the prices will simply and nicely go up. Then when new flats are built, they are sold at 'market prices' and with a 'subsidy'. So nice. The equation in simple form is to manage prices of sold HDB flats to make sure it can only go up. This in turn will create a synthetic market of higher prices for newly built flats. Another option, as a national policy, is to manage the new flats to be really affordable and let 'market' forces determine the prices of sold HDB flats. Both involved interference. Sorry, cannot use that word, a little managing at one end and pretend that the other end is the real market forces. The advantage of the present system is that prices would likely to keep spiralling up and makes owners happy. But new flats would also be equally expensive. The problem comes when there is a crisis and prices plunged. Buy high would mean losing big. In the latter option, prices may not go up too fast and also may not go down much. In a crisis, with smaller outlay, the losses will not be too heavy either. Which is a better policy? One is an illusion of wealth, manipulated and with the danger of people falling flat on their faces. The other is more prudent and less adventurous and less likely to bankrupt the owners.

Google is so funny!

Google has left China and move to the British territory called Hongkong, to escape from Chinese laws and to propagate unfriendly Chinese news. It can now raise the Union Jack and claim protection from Great Britain. I think it should prepare other options like Macau and Taiwan. And if these proved unworkable as well, then it should look no further than Singapore, where there is internet freedom for it to do what it wants in the name of press freedom. It is quite a common thing to read China bashing news here. I strongly recommend Google to relocate to Singapore if it wakes up from its slumber and found out that Hongkong is in China and no longer a British colony.

Casino Autonomous Regions

Smoking allowed in the two casinos. Isn't that great? While Singaporeans have gotten rid of this dirty and smelly habit and could not stand the sight and smell of tobacco and cigarette butts, we know have to bear with them all over again, all because of money. For money's sake, what else do we want to sell out? Maybe we can turn the casinos into autonomous regions and allowed whatever we do not allowed in the main island. Let them have chewing gums, littering and spitting are ok too. And let the Ah Longs operate there. Oh, move Geylang over there too. Just keep all the sleaze there may be a way to keep the main island clean and healthy. What am I talking about? There is one casino in the main prime city area. How? Imagine all the hard works and campaigns and money spent to educate a population to be like the civilised first world, clean, impeccable and sauve, and we are going to abandon it for money. We allowed the foreigners to come here to spit, litter, commit crimes and now to smoke in our midst, in our island in the sun and our prime Marina Bay. What is going on?