The big price gap between these two types of flats came up for
questioning in Parliament. Boon Wan rightly said that one cannot compare
apples with lemons. This really sums up what were at stake and the
perceived unsatisfactory pricing. Some felt that the oldies were ripped
off by paying so much for their studio flats and with so many strings
attached. But then they should be happy that they were getting apples
instead of lemons. Those getting lemons should not complain as the
pricing was just right for lemons.
Putting this aside, the best thing coming out from the discussion is the
kind of profits that studio flats could generate for HDB. In the first
place the pricing for the first owner was already very high compared to
the 2 rm flats. I think HDB must be making a big loss from such a sale.
My apologies for the contradiction.
After 30 years, HDB would have to repossess the flat, upgrade and
refurbish it, and sell it at what kind of price, you can make your
guess. It is going to make another big loss I think, if the same way of
reasoning applies. And the same flat would have another round to go, to
be upgraded, refurbished and sold a third time to another oldie at even
higher price, due to inflation and of course upgrading. And of course,
HDB is going to lose another huge sum of money for reselling it a third
time.
For whatever reasoning and whatever sum of huge losses, I wish that I
could be the developer to build and sell these flats with the same
terms. I don’t mind making all the huge losses for the good of the
people.
10/24/2013
Termination of a train driver, a Sinkie
We have heard the story of the termination of a train driver after 18
years of service. Gintai did not explain exactly why but I gathered it
was due to some minor mistakes he made. What actually went wrong is not
the issue in this article. What I want to address is where should a
Sinkie go from here.
Gintai was with the Police Force before he became a train driver and had chalked up 18 years of experience on this job. He is about 50 and still has many good years to go even if he does not intend to work till 80.
From the company’s point of view, has Gintai committed mistakes serious enough that it was necessary to lose a very experienced train driver with many good years ahead? What is the opportunity cost to hire and train another driver? The new driver could be cheaper without taking the training cost into account. There are opportunity costs involved as well as opportunity to save some money for the company. They can’t be hiring a more experience and higher pay train driver for sure.
The other point is that a Sinkie lost his job, hopefully not to another foreigner to be trained to take his place. Now what shall Gintai do, what are his options if he intends to work again? I think at his age, not working is not an option. We also know that getting a job is a near impossible task.
First, there is only one train company here, so there is no chance of Gintai driving trains again. Neither can he return to the Police Force. If he is to remain in the city, his next job is probably driving taxi. For Gintai to look for any other jobs, retraining is necessary. And he is likely to get a job that would pay him less than his current basic, without the overtime pay. He probably has school going children and a housing mortgage to provide for. He needs an income.
The alternative for Gintai is just not too rosy. The net effect is for the train industry and the train company to lose a trained and very experienced driver. And this driver has to start anew in a new job in a new industry. It is a waste of trained manpower. We value our workforce. Our workforce is our main asset. We foolishly wasted a trained worker who would have to downgrade to do something he has no experience in.
On the whole it is a lose lose situation. Maybe the train company will gain by getting a cheaper and new train driver. And a new driver is born. Very likely a foreigner. Sinkies better be nice to their employers and don’t make mistakes to warrant a dismissal. The consequence is dire straits, and nobody will be there to help you, no institution or organisation will be behind you, except Gilbert.
Gintai was with the Police Force before he became a train driver and had chalked up 18 years of experience on this job. He is about 50 and still has many good years to go even if he does not intend to work till 80.
From the company’s point of view, has Gintai committed mistakes serious enough that it was necessary to lose a very experienced train driver with many good years ahead? What is the opportunity cost to hire and train another driver? The new driver could be cheaper without taking the training cost into account. There are opportunity costs involved as well as opportunity to save some money for the company. They can’t be hiring a more experience and higher pay train driver for sure.
The other point is that a Sinkie lost his job, hopefully not to another foreigner to be trained to take his place. Now what shall Gintai do, what are his options if he intends to work again? I think at his age, not working is not an option. We also know that getting a job is a near impossible task.
First, there is only one train company here, so there is no chance of Gintai driving trains again. Neither can he return to the Police Force. If he is to remain in the city, his next job is probably driving taxi. For Gintai to look for any other jobs, retraining is necessary. And he is likely to get a job that would pay him less than his current basic, without the overtime pay. He probably has school going children and a housing mortgage to provide for. He needs an income.
The alternative for Gintai is just not too rosy. The net effect is for the train industry and the train company to lose a trained and very experienced driver. And this driver has to start anew in a new job in a new industry. It is a waste of trained manpower. We value our workforce. Our workforce is our main asset. We foolishly wasted a trained worker who would have to downgrade to do something he has no experience in.
On the whole it is a lose lose situation. Maybe the train company will gain by getting a cheaper and new train driver. And a new driver is born. Very likely a foreigner. Sinkies better be nice to their employers and don’t make mistakes to warrant a dismissal. The consequence is dire straits, and nobody will be there to help you, no institution or organisation will be behind you, except Gilbert.
10/23/2013
Need to build more private hospitals
The over utilization of our govt privatized hospitals is becoming a joke
when an appointment could be in terms of several months or even years.
What kind of nonsense is this? Many medical problems would have died or
healed by themselves or could have eaten the affected patients. But
never mind. Let’s try to do something positive.
We have a population of 5.4m and a citizen population of 3.31m. The rest, PRs and non residents, make up 2.1m. This is by no means a small number of people. Now you know why our govt privatized hospitals are finding it difficult to cope. Many of these people are really consuming the health services provided by the govt privatized hospitals, leading to high and over utilization.
Perhaps one way to go about improving the quality of healthcare services to the citizens is to encourage the private sectors to build more hospitals to cater to the needs of PRs and non residents. It would be good for everyone, win, win and win solution. The citizens can have better healthcare services from the govt privatized hospitals or private hospitals if they can afford to pay for them. The PRs and non residents can have their private hospitals that are better and well run, to serve them.
And the medical profession can have another big industry to make more money. And more land can be sold to build more hospitals, more employment, more jobs and higher GDP. The MOM may even make exceptions and let them staff with foreigners as this is strictly a foreigners industry. Someone just need to do the sums right, on the cost/benefits to the country for providing such services for foreigners, including good jobs in our first world country and the cost of first world infrastructure.
Have a new directive that foreigners are now allowed in govt private hospitals to ease the bottleneck. They can go to private hospitals. This may ease the jam in public privatized hospitals and shorten the wait for a medical appointment.
What do you think? Think 6.9m coming.
We have a population of 5.4m and a citizen population of 3.31m. The rest, PRs and non residents, make up 2.1m. This is by no means a small number of people. Now you know why our govt privatized hospitals are finding it difficult to cope. Many of these people are really consuming the health services provided by the govt privatized hospitals, leading to high and over utilization.
Perhaps one way to go about improving the quality of healthcare services to the citizens is to encourage the private sectors to build more hospitals to cater to the needs of PRs and non residents. It would be good for everyone, win, win and win solution. The citizens can have better healthcare services from the govt privatized hospitals or private hospitals if they can afford to pay for them. The PRs and non residents can have their private hospitals that are better and well run, to serve them.
And the medical profession can have another big industry to make more money. And more land can be sold to build more hospitals, more employment, more jobs and higher GDP. The MOM may even make exceptions and let them staff with foreigners as this is strictly a foreigners industry. Someone just need to do the sums right, on the cost/benefits to the country for providing such services for foreigners, including good jobs in our first world country and the cost of first world infrastructure.
Have a new directive that foreigners are now allowed in govt private hospitals to ease the bottleneck. They can go to private hospitals. This may ease the jam in public privatized hospitals and shorten the wait for a medical appointment.
What do you think? Think 6.9m coming.
Many questions and answers in Parliament
Many questions were tabled in Parliament and the ministers were busy
answering them. Somehow I find the drift not going the right direction.
What are all the questions about, and what are the parliamentarians
there in the first place?
Parliament has degenerated to a state of talking cock to score points for whichever party. Questions and answers were there to do just that while the interest of the people was secondary, do not really matters. At least that is my impression.
When would Parliament and parliamentarians be there to speak for the interests of the people with politics taking a break? The politickings should be set aside after the GE and all should work together or separately but putting the well beings of the people ahead of everything else. It is time to work for the people.
Roll up your sleeves and get down to work, and forget about party or whether you like that bugger or dislike his or her face. Can we have a bit of sincerity, to deal with issues as elected leaders of the people and working for the people? Do not brush aside the concerns of the people by clever or slippery answers or excuses.
Put the people first and everything will fall into place. When this is not the case, everything will be screw up as the intent is wrong, misplaced and nothing will be right. There are still a couple of years before the next GE and there is time to do things and work for the people. The results will speak for themselves.
The people are watching and the social media can be harsh to those that are just wayanging and not working for the people. The people are not daft for sure. Whether a politician is sincere and genuine will easily be recognized and be put in their place in the next GE. There is no where to run and no where to hide, and no where to talk rubbish or act silly. Those days of going with the flow and hanging on to the gravy train are over.
First base, got problems or no problem? If got problems, what are the problems and what must be done to remove the problems? Or maybe there is no problem so can continue to talk cock and sing song and be merry and enjoy the good office and the good pay and the good blessing of abundance.
Parliament has degenerated to a state of talking cock to score points for whichever party. Questions and answers were there to do just that while the interest of the people was secondary, do not really matters. At least that is my impression.
When would Parliament and parliamentarians be there to speak for the interests of the people with politics taking a break? The politickings should be set aside after the GE and all should work together or separately but putting the well beings of the people ahead of everything else. It is time to work for the people.
Roll up your sleeves and get down to work, and forget about party or whether you like that bugger or dislike his or her face. Can we have a bit of sincerity, to deal with issues as elected leaders of the people and working for the people? Do not brush aside the concerns of the people by clever or slippery answers or excuses.
Put the people first and everything will fall into place. When this is not the case, everything will be screw up as the intent is wrong, misplaced and nothing will be right. There are still a couple of years before the next GE and there is time to do things and work for the people. The results will speak for themselves.
The people are watching and the social media can be harsh to those that are just wayanging and not working for the people. The people are not daft for sure. Whether a politician is sincere and genuine will easily be recognized and be put in their place in the next GE. There is no where to run and no where to hide, and no where to talk rubbish or act silly. Those days of going with the flow and hanging on to the gravy train are over.
First base, got problems or no problem? If got problems, what are the problems and what must be done to remove the problems? Or maybe there is no problem so can continue to talk cock and sing song and be merry and enjoy the good office and the good pay and the good blessing of abundance.
10/22/2013
Hsien Loong – Don’t perform will have to go
During an interview with the CNN Hsien Loong said that anyone in his
team would have to go if they did not perform. This statement has been
quoted by some bloggers as a reason for Boon Wan to go since the MND is
losing several billions for building HDB flats for the people. The issue
is not that simple as it is made up to be.
How shall a minister’s performance be judged, in particular, like the case of building public flats? Should the measurement be about making profit for the govt or building affordable housing for the people? Or should it be about building enough flats for the people are reasonable prices, not affordable prices, and without having to wait for several years? Or should it be about building enough flats to meet the demands of the people without incurring huge losses.
The above questions are quite straight forward reality. In the current case, the issue is not just about the losses, or is it about the losses? And what is this loss, or is there really a loss? This can only come to light if the details of the costing are laid on the table. Then it could become an issue of productivity, efficiency and taking care of the interests of the people. Or it could become an issue to taking care of the interests of the party.
The factors to be used to measure Boon Wan’s performance can be complementary or be in conflict with one another. And different people with different perspectives or vested interests would want to judge his performance according to their own set of good or right factors.
In this case, the loss of several billions is academic, in a way fictitious as it is a matter of right pocket left pocket. That is why Boon Wan could proudly announce it with a blank expression knowing very well it would not affect his performance. If it would, he could easily ask the finance guy to jiggle the factors and numbers to show a profit instead. It is all about what factors to be used for the input.
So, what should be the pertinent factors to be used to judge a minister or Boon Wan to reflect the real performance and the desired results? Should it be the price or the quality of the flats? Should it be the ability to meet the demand and expectation of the people? Should profit be a factor and if so, how should it be measured and what factors should be used to be reasonable?
How shall a minister’s performance be judged, in particular, like the case of building public flats? Should the measurement be about making profit for the govt or building affordable housing for the people? Or should it be about building enough flats for the people are reasonable prices, not affordable prices, and without having to wait for several years? Or should it be about building enough flats to meet the demands of the people without incurring huge losses.
The above questions are quite straight forward reality. In the current case, the issue is not just about the losses, or is it about the losses? And what is this loss, or is there really a loss? This can only come to light if the details of the costing are laid on the table. Then it could become an issue of productivity, efficiency and taking care of the interests of the people. Or it could become an issue to taking care of the interests of the party.
The factors to be used to measure Boon Wan’s performance can be complementary or be in conflict with one another. And different people with different perspectives or vested interests would want to judge his performance according to their own set of good or right factors.
In this case, the loss of several billions is academic, in a way fictitious as it is a matter of right pocket left pocket. That is why Boon Wan could proudly announce it with a blank expression knowing very well it would not affect his performance. If it would, he could easily ask the finance guy to jiggle the factors and numbers to show a profit instead. It is all about what factors to be used for the input.
So, what should be the pertinent factors to be used to judge a minister or Boon Wan to reflect the real performance and the desired results? Should it be the price or the quality of the flats? Should it be the ability to meet the demand and expectation of the people? Should profit be a factor and if so, how should it be measured and what factors should be used to be reasonable?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)