What’s the real problem?

Khaw Boon Wan made the statement that he believed all the first timers who wanted to apply for a BTO flats in non mature estates would have a chance to do so. Is this statement comforting? At first glance it is like saying all those first timers who applied would get their flats, but no. Actually Boon Wan was talking about the chance to apply, nothing about getting the flat. Why is there a need to say this? Any first timer can apply if they have not been kicked out of the system.

This is like saying the NPark needs foldable bikes and foldable bikes are lighter than non foldable bikes. Anyone disagreeing to these statements, or are these the concerns? What are the real issues in both flat applications and the Bromptongate?

What about those first timers that have waited too long because of the cutting down in building flats and ended being kicked out of the scheme when while waiting, their income exceeded HDB? Many young people fell victims to the mismanagement of housing programmes then. They were simply told to empty their savings to buy private.

Now Boon Wan is discouraging them from applying for the 50 year loan gimmick. So what should they do, cannot apply for HDB and not advisable to apply 50 year loan? But the young people don’t really have so much money to splurge. So, would Boon Wan undo the mistakes of his predecessor and allow all the young people that were affected by the arrogant policies to buy a public flat, to be prudent and buy within their means? Just because some jokers said public flats are affordable, so it is affordable? Or just because some jokers decreed that you earn so much you must be able to afford private properties?

What do you think?

After 46 years, still a child

Come next week the nation will be celebrating its 47th birthday as a child that refuses to grow up. The recent bashing of adults for commercial sex which in many mature countries would have brushed aside as a normal human failing and quickly forgotten is a case in point. Why such a big hooha and such a big issue and imprisonment? Are we morally so high up in the clouds that it is necessary to take such a strong view against some indiscretion when no one was hurt in a willing buyer willing seller commercial transaction?

Now we are hearing minister unable to go to sleep because of the bad things being said in the net and children are affected. And there is a need for a code of conduct for bloggers. Is blogging so different from any other pursuits in life that a separate code of conduct is needed? Or is any misconduct that is unacceptable or criminal in blogging not cover by the law? Some terminologies and peculiarities may be new to old verbiage, but these could easily be covered by some amendments to existing legislations and there is really no necessity to reinvent the wheel.

How about a blogging code like the Highway Code and bloggers must sit for a test before being allowed on the net? Come off it. The net is real. This is what the real world is, with a bit of pungent smell now and then, but not life threatening. The life threatening part would definitely be covered by the law and people affected would be protected by the law. The sanitized main media is an artificiality that is good in its own ways like speaking proper English. Speaking Singlish is not an offence. A little indiscretion in the net is a true reflection of life and it is better that children get use to them quickly and grow up quickly. And this growing up process should similarly apply to adults as parents and as regulators.

Is the situation really that bad that a code of conduct is absolutely necessary or is it a case of nothing better to do? What is there that normal ethics and good manners do not prescribe or the law does not cover? There are certainly serious violations in the net, like obviously scam jobs, spamming, spreading viruses etc that should be stopped but everyone closed their eyes so wide that they could not see the harm they are causing. Now we are so worried about what, a little verbal diarrhea, a little vulgarity, a little bullying?

What is the problem that cannot be handled with existing social norms, ethics, morality and the legislation that people are so restless about? Isn’t it time to grow up or nanny is still having an obsessive urge to be over protective? Is this a kind of bipolar disorder or fetish behavior? Do we need COC for cycling in the park or playing football in void decks as well? Or do we need COC for visiting dance halls or discos? These are definitely more dangerous places than visiting the net.

George Lim – SGX/SIAS wrong…

A letter by George Lim the the ST forum warned that it was wrong for SGX and SIAS to encourage the heartlanders to play the stock market. He reckoned that the heartlanders cannot afford to lose compare to the rich. And good shares are beyond them as there are too expensive. And with the rich and well informed also losing in the market, what chance do the heartlanders have to get a decent return in the market?

The first concern is easier to deal with. Just encourage the heartlanders to trade in derivatives. These are cheap and low cost trading instruments for the cheap heartlanders with not much to lose. And all it needs is to educate them on these instruments, hold more talks to equip them to trade effectively and successfully against the proprietary traders and fund managers.

Another area to educate the heartlanders is high speed computer and algo trading. SGX and SIAS may want to make it known to the heartlanders how these two mechanisms work and how they advantage or disadvantage the heartlanders. This is an important disclosure to the innocent heartlanders. They must know who and what their competitors are doing and whether they have a fair chance against the big funds and their trading machines. They must tell the heartlanders that SGX is providing a fair and level playing field for them to trade and their investments are safe in such a safe and fair system.

If I can remember, no one has ever come out to explain how high speed computers and algo trading can affect the small traders. Whose responsibility is it to keep the small investors educated and informed to protect their interests? Or the high speed computers and algo trading are just neutral and innocent mechanism that the small investors have nothing to worry about? In that case, there is no need to keep anyone informed. But if they could be as dangerous as toxic notes and minibonds, then the public and small investors must be duly informed and educated, and caveat emptor will then be more meaningful. Failing to keep the small investors informed of the dangers of these trading mechanisms and to fall back on caveat emptor is unjustifiable and unacceptable.

Have SGX, SIAS and MAS done enough to educate the small investors, particularly the heartlanders before they put their money into the system?

Our govt has delivered…the Olympic medal

The people’s cry or yearning for an Olympic medal must have reached the govt’s ears through the feedback channel. And the govt has worked very hard for the people, to bring a medal to satisfy the people and make the people feel proud as a nation. And the govt has succeeded, just like the Swiss standard of living. Once the govt has promised, it will deliver.

This National Day the people will have another reason to celebrate, to feel proud as Singaporeans. The table tennis team has done us proud. And they could bring another medal in the ladies team event to make two if they have not lost to the Japanese in the semi final.

At the National Day Parade many Sinkies would likely be asked if they want more medals and to kee chiu. The govt would definitely want a confirmation from the Sinkies and if the answer is a resounding yes, more elaborate plans and budget would definitely be in the works for the gold medal in the next Olympic in 2016.

Those who want gold medals must kee chiu. I think even without a show of hands, the govt already got the answer it wanted and would be working towards it. The feedback machinery must have told the govt that the people want more medals and better still a gold medal to do us really proud. What ever the people asked and wanted, the govt is listening and will deliver. And don’t forget the World Cup.

Be prudent and spend within your means

Khaw Boon Wan has again repeated the call to the people to spend within their means when buying a home, He even pointed out to the 50 year housing loan offered by the banks as a gimmick and discouraged people from taking it up. He also reiterated that he would continue to build more flats to cater for those who have been badly affected by the cock policies of his predecessor. Many have been caught without a flat caused by the curtailing of the building programmes and ended seeing their salaries exceeding the HDB ceilings and thus no longer qualify for public housing. This is the group that are being forced into the private market with income that appeared to be high but would be precariously stuck with a huge housing loans should they buy private. Was his predecessor concerned about being prudent and not spending beyond their means?

Now, would Boon Wan go all the way to undo the damages and harm that his predecessor had caused to the young home buyers and undo the wrongdoings by allowing those affected a chance to buy public housing? Forcing young people to buy their first home from the private sector is simply wicked and definitely contrary to what Boon Wan said about being prudent and spending within their means, not over extending themselves on a big mortgage to service for 30 long years.

Let’s see if Boon Wan would walk the talk and do the necessary to help the young people buy their first home after falling victims to his predecessor’s bad policies. Or would it be another case of ‘It happened, what to do?’