A bad policy is a bad policy

When has a bad policy been called a bad policy? I have never heard of a bad policy being called a bad policy in my entire life. And who else from the establishment would dare say such a darn thing? But when things are really getting bad, when it hits the pocket hard, people will say the darnest thing.

Two surprises over two days were just too much to stomach. Yesterday Boon Wan came out with his back to basics for housing, which if faithfully executed, could bring the cost of public housing to a level a few years back. It is still better than the unceasing daily or monthly increases that are being reported. Property prices are higher by so many per cent month on month or year on year, as sure and consistent and predictable as hot air balloon rising.

Today, of all people, Han Fook Kwang wrote in his Sunday sermon that the way COE prices are going up is simply, yes, bad policy. Ouch! Did I hear the wrong thing? No, he elaborated in details why the policies affecting COE were badly managed. As simple as that. So many things were done wrong. It is like saying an old person is a bad driver, a woman is a bad driver, a blond is a bad driver. Just make sure the driver is not an old blond woman all in one.

But I tell you, some minister is going to jump and demand a correction, that it is good policy. And I too agree that it is a good policy, if only I have all the money to pay for the $100k COE. Similarly, all the new measures to curb car ownership are good policies if one can afford a few Ferraris or other super cars. Only those poor losers will say the policies are bad, cause they can’t afford to pay. So, it can be good or bad, depending on whoever is writing the policies and how they affect or do not affect his or her pocket.

Han Fook Kwang concluded by resigning to the new realities. He advised the losers to take public transport. There is no better way out. In consolation he said the people living in big cities like Hongkong, Tokyo, London and New York also taking public transport, so it must be a good thing or a normal thing. Singaporeans have progressed to be more like New Yorkers or Londoners, good quality lifestyle.

Singaporeans should be grateful that their lives have improved over the years, from car ownership to taking public transport. This must be a good thing I supposed. I dunno what is the next good thing that Singaporeans can look forward to?  3rm flats with 30 year lease at $100k without compromising on the quality of life. 2030 is looking so exciting by the way we are progressing. I am really looking forward to it eagerly.

The Diaoyu Islands owner identified

FW: 釣魚島的島主出現了！請速多轉發！(The Diaoyu Islands owner identified)

Thanks, Selwyn, for the article. However, it shows only a record of recent history. In fact,

documentation of Chinese sovereignty over these islands go back even further. Below is

an extract from Wikipedia:  TheDiaoyu Islands - China Wiki –The free encyclopedia on China ...

Whatever the case, the rest of the world is aware of all the ulterior motives behind all these

wrangling and machinations...to contain the awakened dragon!
Regards

Bob

Historical background:
China's earliest record of the Diaoyu Islands can be traced back to the Sui Dynasty, more than 1,000 years ago. At the time, China's Taiwan and the Diaoyu Islands were close to another independent state called Ryukyu (琉球国). And Emperor Yang of the Sui Dynasty (隋炀帝) sent Zhu Kuan (朱宽) as a special emissary to win it over and demand it pledge allegiance to the Sui Court. In the 14th century, Emperor Taizu of the Ming Dynasty (明太祖) was known far and wide for his military prowess. Thus, the King of Ryukyu started to pay tribute to the imperial court officially and Ryukyu became a vassal state of the Ming Dynasty.

The Diaoyu Islands (钓鱼岛)

In 1372, a Chinese named Yang Zai (杨载) landed on the Diaoyu Islands for the first time. There was a detailed record about Diaoyu Islands in the book Sail with the Wind (顺风相送) , a navigational guidebook, which was published during the reign of Emperor Yongle (永乐) of the Ming Dynasty. During that period, people of the Ming Dynasty collected pearls and medicinal ingredients and fished around the Diaoyu Islands under the jurisdiction of Taiwan. This was also clearly recorded in Reports on the Mission to Ryukyu (使琉球录), a book written by Chen Kan (陈侃) in the 11th year of the reign of Emperor Jiaqing (嘉庆) of the Ming Dynasty. In the middle of the Ming Dynasty, some national heroes, such as General Qi Jiguang (戚继光), used the Diaoyu Islands as the strategic line of defense, when they fought against Japanese pirates. In 1602, Japan invaded Ryukyu. From then on, Ryukyu's internal affairs were under the supervision of the Japanese for over 40 years. In 1654, Emperor Kangxi of Qing Dynasty (清康熙帝) bestowed on the King of Ryukyu the title of King Shangzhi (尚质王). Ryukyu was obliged to pay tribute to the imperial court every two years, regarding China as "the Father State" and assuming the reign title of Qing Dynasty. Many maps and nautical charts of the Ming and Qing dynasties clearly marked Diaoyu Islands as part of China's territory.

 

---

Date: Sat, 9 Mar 2013 10:27:56 +0800
Subject: 釣魚島的島主出現了！請速多轉發！(The Diaoyu Islands owner identified)

釣魚島的島主出現了 (The Diaoyu Islands owner identified)

 The document  ""  it says ShengXH had obtained some herbs from the Diaoyu Island and effectively cured Empress Dowager and many other folks. As a commendation of his good deeds, the Empress issued a decree to allow him to continue to use the island to further develop the herbs.  ""

釣魚島的島主出現了(The Diaoyu Islands owner identified)

The real Diaoyu Islands' owner identified。。

With evidence of Empress Dowager Commandment, the Diaoyu Islands' owner identified.

Diaoyu Islands was bestowed to Sheng Xuanhuai of Jiangsu Province of Qing Empire by Commandment.

Please circulate immediately....

釣魚島的島主出現了！

真正的釣魚島島主找到了，有慈禧皇太后的諭旨為證

釣魚島的島主出現了是大清國的江蘇武進人士盛宣懷

 

皇太后慈諭 

太常寺正卿盛宣懷所進藥丸甚有效驗  據奏原料藥材采自臺灣海外釣魚臺小島   靈藥產於海上  功效殊乎中土  知悉該卿家世設藥局  施診給藥  救濟貧病  殊甚嘉許  即將該釣魚臺 黃尾嶼 赤嶼三小島賞給盛宣懷為產業  供采藥之用 其深體皇太后及皇上仁德普被之至意  欽此

光緒十九年十月

（盛宣懷所進皇太后藥丸，原料藥材來自釣魚島，由盛宣懷的天津廣仁堂制）

Prudent car ownership measures

The strong hand of the Govt to introduce prudent thinking among the people in buying cars is a welcome move. The prices of cars have gone way above the means of the people, and so are housing prices and the prices of many luxury items. The new culture of buy first and pay later is creating a nation of debtors. And the biggest culprit towards making people all tied up in debt is housing.

What is so bad about taking a $100k loan to be repayable in 10 years compares to a $500k or $1m loan repayable in 30 years?  I can’t tell the difference except one is of a bigger amount, repayable over a longer period, and also with a longer life span.

Would the Govt also apply the same principle to the housing market to encourage prudence in home buying? How about 50% out front for the buying of a property and repayable in 15 years?  Or it is ok to be less prudent in home buying but not so in car buying?

Khaw Boon Wan, wow, is it real?

The announcement by Boon Wan on the back to basics public housing policy is a move in the right direction and will be most welcomed by the people. The objectives of public housing have been altered through the years by shallow thinking people that have forgotten why it was called public housing in the first place that it is best forgotten. Let’s get the basics right.

Public housing is for the citizens, the majority of whom that needs a roof over their heads, a place to rest and bring up children, a place to go home to. When getting a place to sleep is getting so expensive, it is going to make life very difficult to many people as not everyone is so bless to have so much money to pay for housing.

Boon Wan is calling for more feedbacks given the complexities of housing as a home, as an asset, as a fall back to be liquidated to release some funds for retirement, and a host of other purposes. What I would suggest is to go back to basics and simplicity. The priority is to make housing affordable, I mean really and reasonably affordable to the average citizens, and make the right to ownership simple. Some rules are still necessary but need not be so exclusive and demanding.

First principle, all Singaporeans must be allowed to buy a public flat. Everyone needs a place to stay, especially when you are a citizen.

Second principle, build to ensure the supply is enough to meet the demand and not like those thoughtless people who created the demand supply problem that led to the big angst among the people and a property bubble.

Third principle, provide a buffet spread and let the people decide what they want or can afford to buy. Let the people make their own choice and not dictate the choice on the people.

Fourth principle, when supply is adequate to meet demand, there is no need for all the exclusivity clauses to give impression that the higher income buyers are depriving the lower income earners of their chances. This wicked divisive idea to pitch the people against one another must be removed. Every citizen, regardless of income level, is entitled to buy his public flat within a simpler framework of rules and regulations.

Fifth principle, PRs are not eligible to buy public housing. However, they can rent from the citizens or HDB can build rental flats for them. PRs can go to the private property market if they can afford it. But to prevent a big bubble in private property prices, foreigners, including PRs, can only buy to stay and not for speculation. Given the limited space available, it is necessary to have sound regulations to prevent non citizens from churning the property market to raise the cost of living here. Many of the restrictions on foreign ownership of properties should stay and more be introduced to keep the property market under control.

Sixth principle, the speculative element in public housing should be minimised. When there is adequate supply, public housing prices should be stable.

But, as they all said, how real is Boon Wan and his return to basics? Wait for the fine prints. Hopefully cheaper public housing would not compromise on the size and quality of the flats. Please, no reduction in the lease period or things like can see back to HDB or any profits must return to HDB.

Julia Gillard: We will support your job and put Aussie workers first

‘We will support your job and put Aussie workers first…I don’t want to hear stories of Australians missing out on a job because a 457 visa has been misused.’ Julia Gillard, PM Australia.

This is the kind of commitment by a PM and Govt to its citizens. It is always citizens first. And the Australian workers union leaders are pressuring the Govt to stop the exploitation by foreigners to work in Australia at the expense of Australians.

Compare these to the situation here? What is the position of the Govt and the Union and also the Singaporeans affected, losing their jobs to foreigners?