Are you ready for 7 million people on tiny Singapore?
-
Why business cost is very high now in Singapore? The high business costs also means expensive goods and services and hence high cost of living for people here.
It’s really an oversight of Gahman. The property CMs has instead driven many property investors to buy/trade commercial properties such as retail/office/industries since commercial properties which are not affected by these property CMs. Also, they did not regulate REIT (mostly GLC companies) and thus REITs have monopolies commercial properties. The prices of commercial properties have since surged by 3-4 folds in short period (yet no CM to cool) and this will increase business costs as rental cost surged accordingly. -
Josephine Teo: Balloting for COEs sends the wrong signal
http://www.straitstimes.com/microsites/parliament/story/josephine-teo-balloting-coes-sends-the-wrong-signal-20130208
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Balloting for Certificates of Entitlement (COE) will send the signal to genuine buyers that getting a COE depends on the luck of the draw or resorting to the black market, said Minister of State for Transport Josephine Teo on Friday.
Ms Denise Phua (Moulmein-Kallang GRC) had asked if the current system of bidding for a COE to own a vehicle can be changed to balloting of fixed-priced COEs while retaining the current quota.
Mrs Teo said in a balloting system, even those who have no real intention to buy a car would try their luck because if they get it, they can cash out and \"make a small fortune\".
This would generate additional demand and reduce the chances for those who want to buy a car. It would also lead to a black market where balloted COEs are resold to genuine car buyers at a much higher price, she said. This was the case when Beijing introduced a balloting system for cars in 2011. It saw more than a million applicants for the monthly quotas of 20,000.
Mrs Teo said balloting does not better satisfy the demand for cars. It would be \"next to impossible\" to fix an arbitrary price for balloted COEs that is high enough to deter speculators and yet not too high for genuine buyers. -
The train is crammed with commuters during peak hours. Take Bishan station for example, platform overcrowded, waited for numerous trains to board one that has space for me to squeeze in. On this particular day, it got so bad. Before passengers had time to exit or enter, train door closed because passengers had to squeeze their way out from the sardine can train into sardine packed platform. Wonder what they are doing to solve the transport issue. I even heard one angry commuter commented, "They are going to lose more seats if they are not going to solve the packed train issue." Just head down to a mrt station during peak hour and see for yourself. Want to get car, COE sky rocketing, no wonder my friends are planning to migrate in near future. Time to wake up…7 million people, it’s no easy feat.
-
High COE will lead to higher cost of living as business needs the use of cars and vans, including taxis.
I agree that we should not ballot for COE.
2 problems that I can see with current bidding system:
- The current COE price is too high for genuine buyers - those people who genuinely needs cars to do business/necessity for family’s usage
- It did not deter speculators /car dealers to bid high
To solve these problems, I suggest:
1) Should have 1st-time car owner, 2nd-time car owner, 3rd-time car owner and so on categories and higher quota for 1st-time car owner, much lower quota for 2nd-time owner, even must lower quota for 3rd-time car owner and so on (Quota decrease exponentially with nos of car you own). The quota for more than 1 car must be adjusted such that those can afford to own more than 1/2/3 cars that need to pay much higher. Don’t tell me that some needs more cars because they have big family - you already can have 2 1st-time car owner for a couple (2 of them). Anyway, one can only drive one car at one time. 2nd car is considered as luxury.
2) To deter speculators and yet not too high for genuine buyers. They should also stop allowing car dealers to bid for COE but only allow the car buyers to bid for their own COE instead. Also, people should pay COE at the price they bid (pay as you bid) but not pay at the lowest successful bid. Then, people will not bid skyhigh aka anyhow bid price. -
WeiHan:
Having read your explanation, I have to still disagree with you. Let me deal with your 1st point. I still do not see any concrete basis or evidence that suggests an open social atmosphere results in greater creativity. The soviet union under the communists and Russia under the Tsars were not bastions of an open social atmosphere but produced great technological advances including sending the 1st man into space ahead of the much vaunted US democratic machinery. The subsequent supremacy of the US was due to the inherent inefficiencies of the Soviet era economy and its subsequent crumbling thus preventing the Soviets from capitalizing on their innovations due to the lack of financial resources.
Firstly, I did not equate voting for opposition as allowing for greater creativity. You get me wrong. What I meant was a more open social atmosphere.
All advances in the west did not come about during the dark age when people and idea was oppressed. Note that I am saying that we are oppressed under PAP and need an opposition party.
As for the three examples of North Korea, Iran and China you quoted above. North Korea and Iran has part of the technology from former soviet scientists. China hasn't has alot of technological advances relative to an economy size that we should expected. Even the space technology has critical component technologies that they somehow gotten from German chinese scientists that have worked in Germany for many years. many of their \"advances\" violate copyrights. Besides, one or two technological pinnacle is not sufficient to prove that widespread creativity is present in their society. Alots of creativity including areas of technologies, management, business practice is required to lift the living standard of people once a saturation is reached.
You also already acknowledge that both N Korea and Iran relied on early Soviet technology but then fail to see that the N Koreans and Iranians taking the old Soviet technologies of the 70s and 80s much further. The Soviets would not have been foolish enough to give their most advanced technologies to the Iranians or N Koreans anyway. Yet both these countries with zero open social atmospheres have joined the exclusive nuclear club and exclusive ICBM club. It is a big deal to join these clubs since it requires innovation and expertise in the sciences that most countries including countries with open social atmospheres lack.
I now take umbrage and issue with you suggesting that we Singaporeans are oppressed. It is one thing to criticize govt. policy (which is fair game) but it is quite another to insult the intelligence and integrity of Singaporeans. A person's faith in his Govt. does not equate with him being oppressed and certainly I have never bought into the mindless and silly rhetoric of some opposition parties that we Singaporeans have been deprived of our human rights. It is such insulting and condescending talk by some opposition parties that make me count my blessings that the Singaporean forefathers were not swayed by such sweet snake-oil salesmen opposition talk but believed instead in the democratic ideals set out in our national pledge. That you have to work hard and regardless of race, language or religion, you will succeed.
The western democracies you seem to equate with an open social atmosphere were in the main homogenous white societies, as even in the purported oldest democracy (which the US always claims itself to be) the non-whites (not only blacks but any people of colour such as native Americans) were systematically oppressed. The initial democratic ideals of the whites only democracies were ill suited to the Asian traditions practiced by the Chinese, Japanese, Koreans, Indians and people of the Malay archipelago.
The Singapore pledge blended the ideals of East and West and that is what Singapore has stood for and has shown. The man who crafted the Singapore pledge was born in Malaysia and sent to the UK to study. He listened and accepted some of the western ideals that were being spoken about so passionately when he was abroad. But he was still an Asian and realised that when crafting the pledge he had to create a SINGAPORE pledge. So please save the ridiculous rhetoric of \"PAP oppression\" for people who still believe in the glib tongue of the snake-oil salesman. They will believe anything you want to say. -
JannettLee:
Amazing! 20 years after GST has been implemented, folks still do not understand the raison d'être behind a consumption tax, as opposed to an income tax. :roll:
I know and that's why cost of living is very high for all these countries! There are many ways to generate revenue for governments. If you can't administer GST well, you are incurring high cost of living. This is what we are experiencing the effect of it now and it is a huge burden to majority people here. -
WeiHan:
Hi WeiHan
I'll say that if we we have many creative people that invent and create competitive products that sell to the whole world, many of the problems can be solved. Our problem is partly that we are so beholden to the MNCs, more than Taiwan, Korea etc...
Personally, I do not see any problem with these MNCs. Take Taiwan for example. Their economy is being hollowed out by China. Youth unemployment is at 14%. PPP GDP at <$40,000 is significantly less than Singapore's ($60,000). TFR is lower. Corruption / Bribery highly prevalent in Taiwanese business culture. Singaporeans are angelic in comparison.
Are there more prominent Taiwanese personalities and companies in the world arena than Singapore? Yes
Are Taiwanese more creative than Singaporeans? Looks like it if the quality of TV programs are an appropriate yardstick.
Is Taiwan more democratic than Singapore? I believe so, depending on the kind of benchmarks we use.
Would I want to trade our circumstances for theirs? No.
-
Irrelevant:
The reason for existence is as clear as daylight to generate revenue for government through taxing everybody including the poor and those without income (but still need to live)!
Amazing! 20 years after GST has been implemented, folks still do not understand the raison d'être behind a consumption tax, as opposed to an income tax. :roll:JannettLee:
I know and that's why cost of living is very high for all these countries! There are many ways to generate revenue for governments. If you can't administer GST well, you are incurring high cost of living. This is what we are experiencing the effect of it now and it is a huge burden to majority people here. If not? what is your reason? :skeptical: :rotflmao:
At least Many European/Scandinavian governments have a BIG heart for poor and those without income by waiving VAT for those essential foods and necessities as well as medication. Why Gohman not follow here?
I paid VAT when I was in western world before before I pay GST here in Singapore and knew the differences.
In conclusion, your statement is Irrelevant here.
-
JannettLee:
The reason for existence is as clear as daylight to generate revenue for government through taxing everybody including the poor and those without income (but still need to live)!
Amazing! 20 years after GST has been implemented, folks still do not understand the raison d'être behind a consumption tax, as opposed to an income tax. :roll:Irrelevant:
[quote=\"JannettLee\"]
I know and that's why cost of living is very high for all these countries! There are many ways to generate revenue for governments. If you can't administer GST well, you are incurring high cost of living. This is what we are experiencing the effect of it now and it is a huge burden to majority people here. If not? what is your reason? :skeptical: :rotflmao:[/quote]At the time when GST was 1st mooted there was lobbying that certain essential food items should not have GST because of the poor. Govt. made the promise that GST was essential as a revenue creator so that no. of people paying income tax could be reduced and that Govt. would give GST vouchers to help needy.
To the extent no. of people paying income tax has not increased but has in fact reduced the Govt. has kept to its promise. So there is the raison d'être for Singapore's GST.
Those who complain should look at those countries where GST is >10% and income tax is >30% and where everybody is taxed even when you die! (estate duty tax!), so u pay 3 types of taxes at least. In Singapore everybody pays GST but less than 30%, 20% (???) pay income tax.
Oh btw don't forget many countries have capital gains tax where they tax the profits on the sale of house or shares (Singapore does not have that)
Why do u think so many FTs want to come here? I sometimes wonder why Singaporeans complain so much :siao: -
Every time, the up and coming leader wanted to implement something in the name of reducing stress for students by implementing IP program, cooling property market by CMs and to help the poor by implementing GST (this is a joke!), I am very scare le because he always overlook the consequences of every policy. As a result, create more stressful education system for students here with IP program, incurring more business operating costs and making the unemployed, old, poor and less well to do families’s life worsen.
I knew some have highly regarded him as a person who has foresight but I regarded him as a person who has a lot of oversight instead.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login