Then why are
the property professionals saying ‘what they would like to see from the
authorities is more data, such as the number of years needed for households to
pay off their flats, or the ratio of the flat’s price to household income
tracked over a period of time.’ What these professionals are saying is that
they don’t believe in what the govt and the minister said. And the reason is
simple, so simple. It depends on so many things that are so hazy and subjective
that anyone can claim anything they want by nitpicking on what they want to use
as the data.
Let me point
out a few misleading facts. The above comments about affordability, 80 percent
paying using CPF and not having to touch cash, therefore affordable? And another
number quoted is that ‘they are using a quarter of their monthly income on
average to repay their housing loans’. This is below the international
affordability benchmarks of 30 to 35 percent. Don’t forget, the CPF
contribution is 17 + 20 percent! Using a
$2000 monthly income, the total is $340 +$400 = $740 or 37 per cent if one is
using all his monthly CPF contribution. What about those having to top up with
cash? The bottom line is 37%. How did they get the number of 25 per cent or a
quarter of their income? Ok, maybe got to deduct for Medisave etc.
And income
is household income, not individual or one income. And the affordability is
about HDB flat at the bottom, 2rm or 3rm flats. What about bigger flats, what
about private properties, 3m, 30m, 50m? Should Singaporeans be happy and
contented that 2rm flats are affordable?
What about
retirement? How much is left for retirement after paying for affordable 2rm HDB
flats? What about the number of years to repay? If one needs 30 years to repay,
how many years left for one to save for retirement? In reality, many would be paying and paying
for their entire life as they are not stopping at the first HDB flat. This
means no time to save for retirement, nothing much left for retirement.
Can anyone
ask why until today, when everyone has been kpkbing about housing
affordability, there is still no agreement as to what is the acceptable formula
to measure affordability? Simple, because everyone wants to use data to suit
his agenda to tell the things he wants the people to know. In other words the
truth is selective truth, biased truth, distorted truth, nothing but the truth.
Some
analysts are suggesting using the mid range of the average Singaporeans with
$3k or $4k household income and the price of a 4 rm flat to be used as the
average data for the average Singaporean, not the data of the bottom feeders as
the national data. Or there could be different sets of data, for the 2rm, 3 and
4 rm, 5rm and above, private condos and landed properties to show the different
grades of affordability.
Using a
figure, those of the lowest income and with govt subsidies and grants, is not a
fair measure of affordability. Who is kidding who? Is this a case of statistics
lying or people lying?
Did anyone say honest men don't lie?