How much time left before the rice is cooked?

While Gilbert Goh and his friends are busy planning the May Day Protest Rally, while many angry Singaporeans are rallying for support from their friends and other Singaporeans to make a presence at Hong Lim to make a statement to the Govt’s population policy, time is ticking away. How much time is left to prevent the population from growing from 5.3m to 6.9m in 2030? How much time is left to prevent the population from hitting 6m in 2020?

There was an unusual silence from the govt’s quarter as to what is happening since the White Paper was approved in Parliament in a sure pass voting when PAP held an absolute majority of parliamentary seats. The passing of the unpopular bill with very little support from the citizens has been quickly swept into the cupboard and not to see daylight again. No govt official is willing to talk about it, presumably the whole process and mechanism of bringing in more foreigners to hit the two targets of 6m in 2020 and 6.9m in 2030 are in full swing. Make hay while the sun shines.

If this is so, how many have been added to the 5.3m to date and how many foreigners will be coming in monthly or annually as to plan? According to the projection in the White Paper, the average increase in population is 100k annually or about 8,500 monthly. Two months have passed and the population number must have gone up accordingly. By May Day about 35,000 new migrants would have gone pass the gate. By 2016, 300,000 more heads will add to the current 5.3m to 5.6m.

Is there any change in the position of the Govt on this? As planned, I suppose. And the increase will add to demands for all other services and facilities and more trains, cars, roads and HDB flats and schools and what not…more Jolibees and restaurants and shopping centres and food courts.

At the moment the road to 2016 is a foregone conclusion and 5.6m will be the population by then. Would the GE change anything? A regime change is the only way to put a stop to the population growth and a rewind to a smaller number, maybe 5m or less. So it looks like nothing is going make any difference till 2016 and very likely after 2016, if PAP continues to be in power, the 2020 and 2030 targets of 6m and 6.9m are the likely certainties.

Is there time for change or just wishful thinking?

New definition of affordability of HDB flats

In the papers today, Liu Thai Ker spoke about his times, the premises they used to compute affordability before coming out with HDB prices. This was the old formula, Dr Liu said, ’in those days, flats typically cost about three years of an owners’ salary…we looked at the per capita GDP growth, the sector of people eligible for public housing, their income, and then matching that to our selling price and to our flat sizes. It was really a very detailed study’.

The new innovative formula of the super talents, ‘ the prices of new HDB flats are set based on the typical household of families, the market price of similar resale flats in the vicinity, and the flat size and location.

You can make out the thinking behind the two formulae and the kind of people formulating them and what they were trying to achieve.

Time to stop the housing ponzi

The pioneer of Singapore’s public housing, Dr Liu Thai Ker, has spoken on the need for HDB to return the basics. Dr Aline Wong also joined the call. HDB should go back to provide a roof for all Singaporeans. More and more senior elites from the establishment are saying that things are not going right and needed to take a step back. And the solutions offered by Liu Thai Ker to stop the housing ponzi are not calculus but simple common sense. Build public flats with no frills and build a little extra to the supply. The prices of public housing will adjust accordingly.

The same call was made by Boon Wan but with many catches. Back to basics to offer cheaper flats will necessitate adjusting the products for sale and one could end up buying half an apple, like shorter lease, conditions to sell back to HDB and all the jazz. Why like that?

In today’s media, it was reported that 2 rm and 3 rm flats can be sold at a net price of $57k and $159k respectively after setting off the grants. Hey these prices are quite decent and reasonable. If this can be done, why is there a need to tweak the terms of sales to bring down the prices? Many silly suggestions to make HDB prices cheaper were made by muddle head Singaporeans. The actual cost of building public flat is very much lower and the sale price can be brought down without all the silly suggestions. The fact that the cost of building the flats is being kept secret is telling a big story.

What so far transpired in the media is that the Govt is preoccupied with the need to keep property prices going up. If we don’t bring in more migrants, property prices will come down. What rubbish. Now you understand why 6.9m is necessary? It is to prop up property prices as part of the ponzi scheme. The SERS and en bloc sales will not be feasible without more and more buyers in the pipeline. Every old flat pulled down must be replaced by 5 new flats to justify the cost of rebuilding. Thus, it means you need 5 times the buyers to sustain the scheme. The population must continue to grow even after 6.9m if the property price is go be kept up.

This gravity defying act, by meddling with market forces and supply and demand will all come to naught without the increasing influx of migrants. The 99 year lease will dictate that all such flats must end up with zero value unless they can be pulled down before the lease expires. The ponzi scheme must come to an end sooner or later as the island just cannot keep taking in more and more people and the price of flats keep going up while the workers remain as CBF.

It is better to stop the ponzi housing scheme now with lesser people being hurt and less badly than to allow it to snowball to monstrosity and beyond control, like the American national debt. Too big to do anything or unsolvable without a total collapse of the system.

Obituary – Today we mourn the passing of Feed Me To The Fish

A day has passed and no more news from Fish. His blog is filled with condolence messages to Mrs Fish and the family. It is sad that our social media has lost a booming voice in defense of the common Singaporeans. His last stand was in Hong Lim Park on Feb 16. He was not a lone. His family was with him, and the 4000 Singaporeans that turned up to keep him company. It was an opportunity I missed to meet this honourable man.

Fish will be remembered by all the keyboard warriors in cyberspace and all those who read his blog and are touched by his humble sincerity to fight for the average Singaporeans. I can still remember him singing with gusto from his troubled heart,

‘Do you hear the people sing?

Singing the song of angry men

This is the music of a people

Who would not be slaves again!

When the beating of the heart

Echoes the beating of the drums

There is a life about to start when tomorrow comes’

Fish was very happy that night after the Worker’s Party reclaimed Hougang in a by election. He was joyous as he shared the moment with the people on the streets of Hougang and his video with all in cyberspace.

Bless you Fish. RIP.

So much deference, so little substance

‘Former Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew was speaking at a dialogue on 20th Mar 2013 organized by Standard Chartered Bank [Link] with US Federal Reserve and former chairman of US President Obama’s Economic Recovery Advisory Board, Paul Volcker. Also included was Standard Chartered group CEO Peter Sands.’ Quoted from TRE.

This gathering is best remembered as the last pose to honour the passing of a political giant. His view on population growth as if it is the only way to achieve economic growth was swallowed like a bitter pill, solemnly without much protest, more in due deference to his stature as a senior statesman.

Volcker the economist politely contradicted this flawed growth theory by growing population with this comment, ‘the world “cannot continue to grow” indefinitely, and would have to resign to “being like Japan” eventually. This is in response to LKY lamenting that Japan’s refusal to admit immigrants would see the population halved and eventually becoming nothing. A simple extrapolation on paper may say so, but the realities of how the human race will adjust to different situation will see the race’s continued existence into the future short of a nasty catastrophic disaster.

The assertion that China or all countries must continue to grow their population must be greeted with disbelief. The world would be a better place if the population is reduced by a third, and countries like China and India and even Japan could be better off with a 20% or 30% population reduction. There will be more for everyone and all the unnecessary economic activities to support a bigger population can be made redundant and the resources allocated to more productive and useful things for the rest of the population. Mother earth and the oceans would have a reprieve and time to nurse their wounds and to replenish the livestocks in them.

Population growth for economic growth up to a point becomes meaningless and disastrous, self defeating and self destroying.

The other point harped upon is the value of foreign talents with the assumption that the talents come in peace and to bring goodness to the people. What if the talents are here with their private agenda, to promote their own interests at the expense of the citizens? A country or its govt owes its right to be the govt to look after the interests of its citizens and not the good of foreigners no matter how talented they are. It is treason to allow foreigners to destroy the local population and to rob away their wealth and the right to a good life.

Every country can do away with foreigners when the end result is not a betterment of its citizens. To hell with foreign talents. Every country can grow at their own pace without the need for foreign talents unless these talents are there to advance and complement the general well being of the citizens.