Developing properties for investors

I was kind of, er, uneasy when I heard someone from the property industry talking about developing properties for investors as the next big thing. This statement came after the announcement on changes to allow banks to manage the conveyancing money of buyers. We had a few too many cases of honorable lawyers running away with their clients’ money.

Properties are perhaps the only local produce that we can sell to foreigners for huge profits. We cannot prevent the property developers or anyone who want to make big bucks from selling this product. But we need to be very careful as land is a very limited resource here. Once sold, especially in freehold properties, it is sold forever, like selling Alaska to the Americans by the Russians. We need a policy to limit how much land and freehold properties can be sold to foreigners. If not, all will eventually be sold. The foreigners have all the money to buy up everything on the table.

The other main concern is the public housing market. In the absence of a long term policy to protect housing for the citizens, we may plunge into a deep hole and unable to climb back up. Like it or not, when private property prices shoot to the sky, they will drag prices of public housing along. Good huh?

For now, everyday we are hearing people trumpeting that our public housing prices are affordable. Even so, there are already people living without a roof on their heads. Blame them on their stupidity, losers, misfortunes, luck, etc, they are still citizens of the country and they need a roof over their heads.

And as the prices hit the roof, the number of homeless will only increase. Not everyone is born lucky to be a minister’s son, not everyone is able to inherit a fortune, not everyone is born with super talents. Then there will be the silly ones, the couldn’t care less ones, the ones that live for today and think about tomorrow when tomorrow comes, and the irresponsible ones. Still they need housing.

At the moment the problem is small and a few of these homeless can be kept away from sight. When the problem snowballs, they will be in every corner, every void deck, and the parks and beaches. Someone selling a 4 rm flat the second time could still downgrade to 3rm flats. Those selling 3 rm flats can only hope for a rental flats as the money could not buy them anything in the resale market and neither would HDB sell them a third time.

There must be safeguards and protection of the people’s housing. Public housing must be sheltered from the greed of developers and speculators. If public housing is also thrown into the ring, many will become victims of circumstances and their own wrong doings. In a sea infested with hungry sharks, the hapless will quickly fall victims to the predators.

The superficial huge profits to be gained by some will soon be the misery of many. Don’t play with people’s homes and run people to the streets or the beaches.

The APEC Meeting in progress

Leaders of Asia and the Pacific rim countries are huddling in Vladivostok for their annual powwow to solve the contentious issues in the region. There are territorial claims stretching from the Sakhalin Islands in the north, Dokdo, Diayu and the Spratleys and Paracels in the South China Seas. These are potential flash points that could be ignited by the provocative acts of any party involved in the disputes.

In other parts of the world, the flash points that are boiling in full heat are the Middle East, that somehow is in a perpetual state of warfare. When one flash point died down, another would somehow start to burn.

In South America, the last flash point was in 1982 in the Falkland Islands that somehow belong to the British and not to the Argentines. This is part of the legacies of colonialism and finder’s keepers past.

What is amazing and coincidental is that these flash points are away from Europe and North America. Anyone cares to guess why North America and Europe are free from such flash points but were always involved in one way or another with such conflicts?

Maybe the rest of the world are countries that are contentious, belligerent and enjoying bickering and war. Maybe they are foolish and cannot establish good neighbourly relations. Or maybe there are some other reasons.

And now we have the Americans, in the form of Hillary Clinton, working so hard, flying everywhere, trying to prevent these flash points from bursting into flames. She and the Americans are really the angels, and the saviours of the quarrelsome Asians. Without the Americans, these countries would have gone to war many times over.

In another way, the Americans are like a dog owner with several dogs on leash. Every now and then the dog owner would release the dogs and let them go people chasing. Then they would pull back the leash and those being chased by the dogs would be so grateful that someone is there to control the dogs. The dog owner is the good guy.

Myth 231: The Inclusive Myth

An inclusive society was broached as a national policy only quite recently, perhaps during the last election or the one earlier.  When inclusiveness became a national policy, it was like an acknowledgement that exclusiveness was being practised before. So there is a change now, to include all Sinkies as one people, no alienation, no one is left behind.

For how long and how many people were excluded by govt policies and in what areas are difficult to account for. This morning’s paper confirmed that 4 groups of citizens have been excluded and fell victims to govt policies in public housing. But only 3 groups were mentioned and the fourth group is conveniently not spoken of and would probably be left out again, excluded in an inclusive society when no one is left behind, except this group.

For the mismanagement of the public housing policies that victimised many citizens financially and in a way also the fate of baby making and TFR, 4 groups of people were not eligible to buy HDB flats on the false justification that the supply was not enough. The real reason for the shortage is not building enough. But the daft Sinkies ended up fighting against each other for priority and seeing other groups joining the queue as their enemies. They are so daft that they would not think or could not think, and would not see that the real culprit for not building enough public flats for the people is not the demand but the supply. And they blamed themselves, the buyers, and accused each other, and to exclude others from the queue to protect their own interests and priority.

The 3 groups identified as victims of systemic discrimination are, ‘those who have never married, single parents and those married to foreigners’. The fourth group is silent and would remain as the victims of a system that bragged about inclusiveness but excluded them. The pain is greater when foreigners turned new citizens are favoured against them. Who make up this group?

How could a govt policy exclude single parents from buying HDB flats and did not think it is nasty? It really describes the kind of people formulating such policy, totally devoid of compassion. Are the single parent families not human beans and need a place to stay as well? Do they have any alternative if they could not buy HDB flats? Imagine how long this group has been leading their lives like lepers? They have been written off, no one wants to know of their plight till now. Can our caring govt be so uncaring?

The same kind of inhuman touch applies to those who are married to foreigners. They too need a place to stay. For the family to be half citizen, there could always be a formula to differentiate the level of subsidies and this need not be the same as citizens, but they must have a chance to buy a flat to stay. They can’t camp at the beach or Vivian will come visiting.

The singles may see a reprieve. But it may not be much of a reprieve at the end of the day. Don’t forget that there is a $10k income ceiling in place for households. Would this mean singles can qualify if his/her income is $5k? And quite a big number of these singles are professionals and high income earners, due partly because of their jobs and partly because they cannot buy when younger when income was lower. Many could still be excluded by the income ceiling like those newly married couples who married late and ended with higher income that kicked them out of the system.

Nobody, single or married couples, started work with income exceeding the $10k limit. They have to work their way up. So if they married earlier, or buy their flats earlier, they would all be eligible. But for one reason or another, definitely not their faults, they ended up with higher incomes and become victims of an inclusive myth. It was a systemic failure that would not be admitted and would likely not be put right.

Out of the 4 groups, one is forgotten, the singles will hardly be a solution, those married to foreigners who are high income earners too may still be excluded. The solutions may still be found wanting with many still excluded from the public housing scheme.

Did someone say every young married couple, first timer, will be able to buy a flat? The inclusive cry is mainly for foreigners who have become new citizens. They are the ones that benefited most at the expense of original citizens.

My National Conversation Thread

I seriously want to engage seriously in the National Conversation, either here or wherever that is fitting for such a conversation. I have only one caveat. Would anyone want to pay me for doing so? Time is money, effort cost money, and one cannot really do justice in a National Conversation without putting in serious time and serious effort which don’t come free.

It would really be nice, very nice, to engage in a National Conversation, for a month or two, I could dedicate the whole blog to it, if I am paid to conduct the conversation. I will really enjoy conversing with anyone on anything national, with pay of course.

They say talk is cheap. But National Conversation cannot be cheap right. How nice, being paid just to conduct a conversation here.

The new transparency game rule

After all the cry father and cry mother about not being transparent, there are positive signs that transparency is the new game in town. And some elite of the society have started the ball rolling, starting with the public airing of medical reports and diagnosis of client’s condition.

We have a case of a client’s mental condition being read out in the media. And as the nature of the condition was so life threatening, I presume, that the recommendation to put the client behind the doors of a mental institution also became public knowledge, with a public warning to act against the client/patient. I am not sure if I am comfortable with this kind of transparency, but transparency it is. And the public now are deserving to know the details of client’s medical condition if deemed fit by the doctors. At what point would a doctor openly make his findings public is not specified in details yet. But patients must now be prepared for laundry washing at the prerogative of the professionals they are seeking help.

Then we have this old man telling his MP how racist he was, his thinking and attitude. Of course it is always good for the public to know that such racist odd balls are living among us and to be guarded of their twisted views. People with such tendencies are bad and should be sent to the psychiatrist for an assessment and tested for suitability to become permanent residents in Woodbridge. It is not just quipping about their idiosyncrasies and thinks nothing of it. Follow up measures must be taken to keep the problem under the lid. I just hope that this guy did not have bipolar sickness or other psychiatric problems. If he does, better to put him away for good.

Then there was a couple who wanted their MP to tell lies. How thoughtless and unreasonable people can be and demanding an MP to tell lies. Got shadow or not? 有影别？There seems to be a new level of transparency in the profession of MPs as long as no names are mentioned. No one will know who the party was and no one will be wiser. 

This kind of transparency practice is good. It is a good start. The people can now expect to see more and more transparency in all fields of activities. The bloggers also must discard their anonymity, those anti establishment and those insurgents planted to discredit bloggers as well. It must be both ways right? Cannot be transparent for some and not transparent for some.

There must also be some caveats to this road to more openness. Conversations that would be otherwise confidential and could now be divulged would need cautionary notes pasted at the door so that people understand the new rule before entering to confide with another party. Me thinks of confession to the fatherly figure and whether it is also applicable to this new transparent norm. And there are certain things that no matter how, cannot be transparent. Things like construction cost of public flats as these could fall under the category of national secrets. The people should understand what can be transparent and what cannot be transparent, particularly things relating to money matters.

Other than these exceptions, let’s all be more transparent, like wearing transparent clothes.

Asean farting nonsense

Asean lately is preoccupied with its quarrel with China, and the main issues stated are freedom of sea navigation, territorial dispute and Asean’s unity. Let me just deal with the strawman within Asean, its unity as a regional bloc of countries trying to present a single view or position to other blocs or big countries.

The differences within the Asean bloc of countries need no further clarification, from social, political, economic and religious angles, Asean countries are like oil and water. For Asean countries to come together, the glue is at best the lowest common denominator. The only area that Asean could ever think of gelling together as one in a lose way is economic cooperation. Politically, with the entry of Vietnam, another ambitious regional power, the level of complexities increases by leaps and bounds.

Vietnam and the Philippines have territorial claims with China and their willingness to drag in the Americans will only raise the temperature and tension in the region. It is increasing daily with the Americans fanning the fire and waiting to make the most out of this regional dispute. Asean unity is now in the frying pan. Can Asean countries afford to take sides as a united bloc on such national and territorial issues? Fat hope. But some Asean countries seem to differ and wanted Asean to be united as one in its negotiation and claims against Chinese territories. Only foolish govt will think that the Chinese will allow their territories to be taken from them because some jokers decided to make a claim for it. The Filipino mentality of claims did not fade away with the Marcos. And they really think that with the American gunboats behind them they could succeed. The same kind of thinking applies to Vietnam. China will go to war with the US if its territorial sovereignty is challenged. They are tolerating the Japanese to maintain good relations, but some Japanese are seeing this as a weakness to be exploited. Think of the eventualities if there is a war between China and Japan today?

The most silly issue Asean is farting around is freedom of navigation. This is an issue that has never been an issue until the Philippines and Vietnamese started to harass and arrest Chinese ships. Funny isn’t it? The trouble makers are pointing the fingers at the Chinese. But when the real devil has its fingers in the region, tension will rise and non existence conflict will simply flare up.

The real threat to freedom of navigation at one time was the Malacca and Sunda Straits. But with regime changed, pragmatism and common sense prevail and the two waterways are now free for ships to cross as international highways.

What about east Africa? Is there a problem that threatens freedom of navigation? Why is there a problem and the Empire with all its resources is unable to quell it? Why are the 6th or 7th Fleets of the world’s most powerful navy not there to clear the waterway to ensure freedom of navigation? Where is Hillary? Still cooking her soup in the kitchen?

There is a clear and present danger, and threats to freedom of navigation in the east African sea. Instead of defending the freedom of navigation there, the Americans are harping up a threat in South China Sea when there was none except when the Vietnamese and the Filipinos start to behave like pirates. And Asean, as usual, have to act on someone else’s agenda, acting on an imaginery threat that is non existence before. And they are blowing hot and cold, from Manila, Jakarta, Singapore, Hanoi to Beijing. The ill wind actually came from across the Pacific Ocean in the guise of peace and stability, and the hegemonic umbrella of the Empire. So Asean now has a monster to fight and the Asean countries are having sleepless nights, sharing the same bed and the same nightmare. The threat of freedom to navigation is as real as they make it and want to believe it in, or as spun by the Empire.

Asean can go on farting and act important. It is as good as NATO in credibility in forming a united front against any super power. Its agenda in the annual Asean Summit Meeting has been hijacked unceremoniously without it knowing what has happened.

What constitutes a racist word

Lately the word keleng has appeared more often than usual and quoted as a racist term used by the non Indians on the Indians. The Indians have also often been called mama or mamak, also seen as racist by some Indians. Are these words really racist in intent? What were their origins? Actually I don’t know. Some relate the word keleng to Kling, a battery of Indian soldiers during the colonial days. Today I heard it was from the word Kilinga or Kaligina, an Indian warrior tribe, which cannot be derogatory. I could still remember a long long time ago when I heard my mother referred to the Indians as kelengna. And when she used the word, there was not the faintest trace of racism or dismissal. It was just a word to call the Indians by the illiterate.

Many tend to forget that the early immigrants here were mainly from the uneducated peasant class who knew of very few things and words. They just adopted and made use of whatever words in their limited vocabulary to get by their daily lives. And in those days, people were simply hungry and had no time for anything but just to work and sleep. Racism was not in the mind of hungry migrants. It is not a luxury of the pseudo affluence or nouveau riche.

Just like the word mama or mamak. It was just picked up in the pasar by the non Indians without even knowing what it meant, a convenience of ignorance. Fortunately when I later found out, it was meant to be uncle in Indian. But the illiterate and unschooled would not know and would not know if it is intended to be racist. And it is unbelieveable that some Indians took offence for being called mama or mamak. I hope some can enlighten on this perception.

I used to call the Hongkongers Hongkie for convenience. But Hongkie was used by many with a tinge of insult. I used it for convenience just like I substitute Singaporeans, a tongue twister to Sinkie, sometimes with full innocence, sometimes with a tinge of mischief.

You are so cheena. Now that word is used in the right sense, not very friendly. The word China was traced to all kinds of origins by apologetic scholars not to offend the Chinese, linking to Chin Dynasty and some other craps. But it was used by the Brits to insult the Chinese as a people as breakable as clay. And since they wrote the maps, they conveniently used it, China for a country that the Chinese used to call Zhongquo or by dynastic names, never China. China was never a Chinese word except used by the Brits to describe a kind of porcelain. Likewise India was likely to be a British creation like they called the American natives Red Indians. Some said the word Indian is derogatory too. Of course the same apologetic scholars will link it to something like the Indus River or something like that.

Many words were created or used by users without knowing what they originally meant. But to the receivers, depending on how sensitive or highly sensitive they are, they can be offended and think that it is an insult or racism. Hongkie is in a way less naughty than chinky or chink. Chink or chinky will definitely fall clearly to the derogatory category and more so than Keleng or mama or mamak.

How many Chinese are called PRC chink or Sinkie chink and just ignored it without screaming racism? Many a time, such words were uttered by an individual against another, and yes, sometimes with racist bias. A laundry tag is racist mind you, if one understands its origin and the context when it is used. The Brits have a lot of racist terms incorporated into their dictionary as acceptable usage but really racist in origin and intent. Yellow culture, yellow press and turning yellow are their racist terms for anything Chinese. But many banana Chinese are using these terms happily without knowing why.

So, what is a racist word will depend partly on how racist a person is, the user and the target. Sensible people would not relate every word said to racism. Often it may be due to ignorance or density.