This is the forecast by the UN for year 2100 if the current reproductive rate is maintained. The earth is now hosting 7 billion human beans, and the resources are being strained. Not enough water, energy and food. The oceans’ stocks of fish are depleting, energy and natural resources are being consumed at a faster rate that is unsustainable.
But the good news for such phenomenal growth in population is that economic growth data will be in the positive. It will be growth, growth and growth. Singapore’s population will be 10m by then or more.
The earth is warming, not because of the big hole in the sky. It is the heat of human bodies and the consumption of resources for human activities that are warming the earth. The most irresponsible act of the human beans is population growth, which leads to one thing, consumption of the earth. But the economists will tell you growth is good, and govts bought into the growth myth. With growth, life will be better.
Yes, but for how long? What if all the govts continue to pursue growth, by growing their population?
11/01/2011
10/31/2011
When the plundering and looting are over
500 years of plundering and looting are over for the Western nations. Europe and America enjoyed 500 years of prosperity built on slave trades, conquests and looting in the form of war reparations from defeated countries. They robbed the African and Asian states of land and resources as well as enriching themselves from the slave trades.
These excesses were the foundation for the centuries of prosperity, renaissance and cultural refinement and the good life in Europe and America, transforming peasants, bandits and pirates, to gentries and aristocrats. The wealth of plundering has nearly been exhausted and the ingenuities and progress in science and technology alone could not sustain the same level of richness and affluence in both continents. They did not think nor expect that the wealth could go off so fast. They continued to indulge in a lifestyle they were accustomed to from spending future money and borrowing.
Unfortunately it is game over. Without real production and productivity, without generating enough to cover the over consumption, the rich lifestyle is just not sustainable. Now they are in debt, some knee deep, some up to their neck.
And who did Europe turn to for more freebies and financial handouts? The very victims of their conquests and plundering, the emerging countries of Asia particularly China, the country they turned into the Sick Man of Asia. They bankrupted China, robbed away its dignity, pride and confidence as a nation, as a people, to live a better life with equal rights like all human beans.
The Chinese people are angry. China is still a poor developing country. Why should they used their hard earned savings, through toiling in factories and eating less, and getting by with less material comfort, to help the plunderers who consumed more of what they had and wanting to continue the good life? The plunderers had already had a good time on their expenses by robbing their country of its wealth, and dignity, it is time that they had a taste of living a humbler lifestyle, and not badmouthing China and the Chinese as crude and poor peasants with no refinement in manners and social behaviours, and imposing all kinds of trade discriminations.
Let’s see how refine and well manner they will be without the money and power. Let the world see how the bandits and pirates return to their days of plundering and rampage of other weaker nations. Would that be the new reality, a replay of history as what it was in the days of conquest and colonialism?
These excesses were the foundation for the centuries of prosperity, renaissance and cultural refinement and the good life in Europe and America, transforming peasants, bandits and pirates, to gentries and aristocrats. The wealth of plundering has nearly been exhausted and the ingenuities and progress in science and technology alone could not sustain the same level of richness and affluence in both continents. They did not think nor expect that the wealth could go off so fast. They continued to indulge in a lifestyle they were accustomed to from spending future money and borrowing.
Unfortunately it is game over. Without real production and productivity, without generating enough to cover the over consumption, the rich lifestyle is just not sustainable. Now they are in debt, some knee deep, some up to their neck.
And who did Europe turn to for more freebies and financial handouts? The very victims of their conquests and plundering, the emerging countries of Asia particularly China, the country they turned into the Sick Man of Asia. They bankrupted China, robbed away its dignity, pride and confidence as a nation, as a people, to live a better life with equal rights like all human beans.
The Chinese people are angry. China is still a poor developing country. Why should they used their hard earned savings, through toiling in factories and eating less, and getting by with less material comfort, to help the plunderers who consumed more of what they had and wanting to continue the good life? The plunderers had already had a good time on their expenses by robbing their country of its wealth, and dignity, it is time that they had a taste of living a humbler lifestyle, and not badmouthing China and the Chinese as crude and poor peasants with no refinement in manners and social behaviours, and imposing all kinds of trade discriminations.
Let’s see how refine and well manner they will be without the money and power. Let the world see how the bandits and pirates return to their days of plundering and rampage of other weaker nations. Would that be the new reality, a replay of history as what it was in the days of conquest and colonialism?
The truth and lies of home ownership
There are some bloggers who are here to spread half truths and misinformation about the state of home ownership situation and I feel obliged to state their position against what is the real truth.
Some Singaporeans are still unhappy with the housing issue and to these bloggers it is really the fault of the Singaporeans. They accused the unhappy Singaporeans for unreasonable expectations and told them to live within their means, ie, Singaporeans should buy the flats according to what they could afford. So got money buy bigger flats, no money buy smaller flats. No one is forcing Singaporeans to buy bigger properties!
They chided the Singaporeans for being unappreciative of their blessed situation, that they are lucky to be able to own a flat, big or small, as if without the govt they would not even have a roof over their heads. And that Singaporeans should be contented with a 3rm or 4 rm flat given the limited land we have.
One even said that it was better to buy a 4 rm flat instead of a car as if the choice is an either or situation. He would not want to know what causes high COEs and traffic congestions. Any school boy would be able to tell him why. If the population is not allowed to grow to such a size, there will be enough land for houses and cars.
Another truth is that what the govt is doing to solve the housing problems is the best and no one can do better, so be grateful. Who has the monopoly of wisdom and solutions? And housing is still affordable. Of course, even if a 3 rm flat is to cost $1m, it is still affordable. Just stretch it to 99 year repayment for the loan. And why not, COE is 10 years, so car loan can be stretched to 10 years. How many still believe in this affordable myth?
The affordable definition for housing is akin to forcing Singaporeans to live dangerously. Once a flat is bought based on two incomes for 30 years, pray that the two income will be there for the next 30 years. Loss of one income means loss of the flat, no longer affordable. Is this how the people are encouraged to live by, commit themselves to the neck for 30 years?
Whether the above are truths or misinformation everyone can decide for themselves. Allow me here to list out some of the hard truths, and of course if anyone thinks that what I wrote are misinformation or half truths, feel free to disagree with me.
The first truth, we have enough land to meet the demands of all our citizens for housing, provided we don’t recklessly increase the population to a point of beyond our control. Look at what Boon Wan is building. If there is not enough land, then the bringing in of more foreigners is very dangerous. We could still build and build to sell the foreigners. We have enough land for our citizens.
There is no shortage of supply for public housing. The shortage is temporary and due to bad decision and planning not to build. Everyone can have his choice of flats, and even if the richer Singaporeans were to buy smaller flats, given the restriction on speculation and owning private properties, no citizen is depriving another citizen from the chance of owning a flat, IF there is a willingness to build. There will even be enough flats for singles, broken up families etc etc.
The govt dictates how many flats to be built, when and where.
The govt dictates the price to sell, which is now blamed on market forces.
The govt dictates who can buy and who cannot buy.
The govt also dictates who can buy what and cannot buy what type of flats. Those with higher incomes are FORCED to buy bigger flats or buy more expensive flats from the private developers. Not true?
Because of the above, the people are not allowed to buy flats within their means, or buy smaller flats relative to their income. Heard of income ceilings and what are they for?
If the govt is controlling and dictating everything related to housing supply, who is the cause of the housing problem?
Did I tell lies or misinformation? You be the judge. Let those who have eyes see. But for those who refuse to see, let it be.
Some Singaporeans are still unhappy with the housing issue and to these bloggers it is really the fault of the Singaporeans. They accused the unhappy Singaporeans for unreasonable expectations and told them to live within their means, ie, Singaporeans should buy the flats according to what they could afford. So got money buy bigger flats, no money buy smaller flats. No one is forcing Singaporeans to buy bigger properties!
They chided the Singaporeans for being unappreciative of their blessed situation, that they are lucky to be able to own a flat, big or small, as if without the govt they would not even have a roof over their heads. And that Singaporeans should be contented with a 3rm or 4 rm flat given the limited land we have.
One even said that it was better to buy a 4 rm flat instead of a car as if the choice is an either or situation. He would not want to know what causes high COEs and traffic congestions. Any school boy would be able to tell him why. If the population is not allowed to grow to such a size, there will be enough land for houses and cars.
Another truth is that what the govt is doing to solve the housing problems is the best and no one can do better, so be grateful. Who has the monopoly of wisdom and solutions? And housing is still affordable. Of course, even if a 3 rm flat is to cost $1m, it is still affordable. Just stretch it to 99 year repayment for the loan. And why not, COE is 10 years, so car loan can be stretched to 10 years. How many still believe in this affordable myth?
The affordable definition for housing is akin to forcing Singaporeans to live dangerously. Once a flat is bought based on two incomes for 30 years, pray that the two income will be there for the next 30 years. Loss of one income means loss of the flat, no longer affordable. Is this how the people are encouraged to live by, commit themselves to the neck for 30 years?
Whether the above are truths or misinformation everyone can decide for themselves. Allow me here to list out some of the hard truths, and of course if anyone thinks that what I wrote are misinformation or half truths, feel free to disagree with me.
The first truth, we have enough land to meet the demands of all our citizens for housing, provided we don’t recklessly increase the population to a point of beyond our control. Look at what Boon Wan is building. If there is not enough land, then the bringing in of more foreigners is very dangerous. We could still build and build to sell the foreigners. We have enough land for our citizens.
There is no shortage of supply for public housing. The shortage is temporary and due to bad decision and planning not to build. Everyone can have his choice of flats, and even if the richer Singaporeans were to buy smaller flats, given the restriction on speculation and owning private properties, no citizen is depriving another citizen from the chance of owning a flat, IF there is a willingness to build. There will even be enough flats for singles, broken up families etc etc.
The govt dictates how many flats to be built, when and where.
The govt dictates the price to sell, which is now blamed on market forces.
The govt dictates who can buy and who cannot buy.
The govt also dictates who can buy what and cannot buy what type of flats. Those with higher incomes are FORCED to buy bigger flats or buy more expensive flats from the private developers. Not true?
Because of the above, the people are not allowed to buy flats within their means, or buy smaller flats relative to their income. Heard of income ceilings and what are they for?
If the govt is controlling and dictating everything related to housing supply, who is the cause of the housing problem?
Did I tell lies or misinformation? You be the judge. Let those who have eyes see. But for those who refuse to see, let it be.
10/30/2011
The i phenomenon
My generation is not that computer savvy to follow the latest trends in technology. What I discovered is that anything that is worth buying and carrying to show off starts with i. I am getting to be familiar with iphone, ipad, icloud, i computing, but not really know what they can do for me. The latest iphone from Apple has created such a sensation that I was told of overnight queues on the day of its launch.
My 70 plus friend is carrying one and fiddling with it amorously whenever in our presence, in the restaurant or on the bar counter. He has that smug look on his face every time he gives it a tender loving stroke. He proudly proclaimed that we need to keep up with technology and an iphone is a good start. I am still using my black and white Motorola which I don’t remember the name of the model. It still allows me to make a call or do a sms. And that is all I used it for.
The iphone craze is most prevalent in the train. Many are practically glued to the little gitzmos in their hands and making all kinds of funny noises. Sometimes out of curiosity I would steal a side glance to find out what the excitement was. Most often than not they were having funs with little colour orbs flowing and bursting along the way. I thought it was exciting and wanting to get one but only to be put off by the price of it.
I read it in the Sunday Times that the latest accessory to be seen with is iAM. Many celebrities in China, Hongkong and Taiwan are showing off with them. Michele Yeoh has or had one. Teresa Teng too had one and so did Maggie Cheong. Karen Mok, Gigi Leung and Coco Lee did not want to miss out and have recently got their own iAM. This latest contraption to be seen with in the arms of these celebs is actually called iAngmoh. The best and most expensive model is owned by Wendy Deng. And she has rechristianed it to iMurdoch.
Oh, sorry guys, such accessories are only for the ladies. The Singapore equivalent which is gaining in popularity is iDuck an Asean model.
My 70 plus friend is carrying one and fiddling with it amorously whenever in our presence, in the restaurant or on the bar counter. He has that smug look on his face every time he gives it a tender loving stroke. He proudly proclaimed that we need to keep up with technology and an iphone is a good start. I am still using my black and white Motorola which I don’t remember the name of the model. It still allows me to make a call or do a sms. And that is all I used it for.
The iphone craze is most prevalent in the train. Many are practically glued to the little gitzmos in their hands and making all kinds of funny noises. Sometimes out of curiosity I would steal a side glance to find out what the excitement was. Most often than not they were having funs with little colour orbs flowing and bursting along the way. I thought it was exciting and wanting to get one but only to be put off by the price of it.
I read it in the Sunday Times that the latest accessory to be seen with is iAM. Many celebrities in China, Hongkong and Taiwan are showing off with them. Michele Yeoh has or had one. Teresa Teng too had one and so did Maggie Cheong. Karen Mok, Gigi Leung and Coco Lee did not want to miss out and have recently got their own iAM. This latest contraption to be seen with in the arms of these celebs is actually called iAngmoh. The best and most expensive model is owned by Wendy Deng. And she has rechristianed it to iMurdoch.
Oh, sorry guys, such accessories are only for the ladies. The Singapore equivalent which is gaining in popularity is iDuck an Asean model.
10/29/2011
Has anything really changed under Boon Wan?
The latest cry of resale prices of HDB flat still soaring and that supply is shrinking, or demand is rising, tells of a picture that nothing has changed. Whatever that have changed were merely cosmetic or stop gap measures. The fundamental position of the govt on housing has remained intact.
From providing cheap and good housing, today it is housing for profit, and maximum profit if possible. Housing is also an instrument for speculation, for fictitious wealth creation when the gains are quickly swallowed by higher cost of living and inflation, and for fattening the state coffer.
Under normal circumstances there is nothing wrong with such policies and economic enterprise. Housing becomes an economic good for trading, for people to make money and lose money, for the govt to generate revenue to feed the high salary of the system. Housing is a cash cow that must keep on churning out cash that is badly needed in the system, like all other sources of revenue. When the expenditure is so high, it must be matched by an equally high income.
Unless there is a structural change, the huge growing population and the reliance on housing as a major source of govt revenue, nothing will change in the property market. Like the Stop At Two policy, the No Casino policy, the restriction on foreigners buying landed properties, $90 NS allowance, etc, they were good and relevant at one time but no longer relevant today.
Housing, as a speculative economic good, needs to be reviewed in view of the changing socio economic and infrastructural limitations of the country. The govt needs to house the people well and cheaply. The runaway cost of living, the high cost of housing, cannot go on and on without breaking the social fabric of our society.
Would there be any fundamental changes to how housing is to serve the people’s need, to provide the people with good homes that are really affordable, to give the people a better quality of life? To continue squeezing the limited finances of the people for 30 years, to empty their wallets when the money could be used for many other more important things in life, and for retirement, is harming the welfare and well being of the people in the long run.
Would the govt relook at housing as a basic core item for the people’s good, without killing them in the process, without compromising the quality of their lifestyle? Would govt see housing as an essential item, not for speculation, and its responsibility to ensure that there is an abundance of housing to keep the price down at least in public housing, where every citizen who wants a flat will have his flat minus the pain and anguish?
Would all the silly terms and conditions be removed once and for all? Singles, married, unmarried, broken family, big income, small income, all will be eligible and can afford housing at their own discretion by virtue of being a citizen of the country? The issue is supply, in building enough to meet the needs of the citizens, with wise policies, and managing the demands from the reckless influx of foreigners and a population that is too big for the people’s good.
Let the pain and anxiety of acquiring a home be removed and no longer be a daily frustration in the life of the average citizen. When housing is no longer a bugging emotional and financial issue, the people can move on to indulge in other pursuits of living, to live an excellent life. Removing housing from the equation of life’s struggle will be a major positive change in the life of all Singaporeans. It will save a lot of time and financial resources for a better quality of life.
From providing cheap and good housing, today it is housing for profit, and maximum profit if possible. Housing is also an instrument for speculation, for fictitious wealth creation when the gains are quickly swallowed by higher cost of living and inflation, and for fattening the state coffer.
Under normal circumstances there is nothing wrong with such policies and economic enterprise. Housing becomes an economic good for trading, for people to make money and lose money, for the govt to generate revenue to feed the high salary of the system. Housing is a cash cow that must keep on churning out cash that is badly needed in the system, like all other sources of revenue. When the expenditure is so high, it must be matched by an equally high income.
Unless there is a structural change, the huge growing population and the reliance on housing as a major source of govt revenue, nothing will change in the property market. Like the Stop At Two policy, the No Casino policy, the restriction on foreigners buying landed properties, $90 NS allowance, etc, they were good and relevant at one time but no longer relevant today.
Housing, as a speculative economic good, needs to be reviewed in view of the changing socio economic and infrastructural limitations of the country. The govt needs to house the people well and cheaply. The runaway cost of living, the high cost of housing, cannot go on and on without breaking the social fabric of our society.
Would there be any fundamental changes to how housing is to serve the people’s need, to provide the people with good homes that are really affordable, to give the people a better quality of life? To continue squeezing the limited finances of the people for 30 years, to empty their wallets when the money could be used for many other more important things in life, and for retirement, is harming the welfare and well being of the people in the long run.
Would the govt relook at housing as a basic core item for the people’s good, without killing them in the process, without compromising the quality of their lifestyle? Would govt see housing as an essential item, not for speculation, and its responsibility to ensure that there is an abundance of housing to keep the price down at least in public housing, where every citizen who wants a flat will have his flat minus the pain and anguish?
Would all the silly terms and conditions be removed once and for all? Singles, married, unmarried, broken family, big income, small income, all will be eligible and can afford housing at their own discretion by virtue of being a citizen of the country? The issue is supply, in building enough to meet the needs of the citizens, with wise policies, and managing the demands from the reckless influx of foreigners and a population that is too big for the people’s good.
Let the pain and anxiety of acquiring a home be removed and no longer be a daily frustration in the life of the average citizen. When housing is no longer a bugging emotional and financial issue, the people can move on to indulge in other pursuits of living, to live an excellent life. Removing housing from the equation of life’s struggle will be a major positive change in the life of all Singaporeans. It will save a lot of time and financial resources for a better quality of life.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)