• IP addresses are NOT logged in this forum so there's no point asking. Please note that this forum is full of homophobes, racists, lunatics, schizophrenics & absolute nut jobs with a smattering of geniuses, Chinese chauvinists, Moderate Muslims and last but not least a couple of "know-it-alls" constantly sprouting their dubious wisdom. If you believe that content generated by unsavory characters might cause you offense PLEASE LEAVE NOW! Sammyboy Admin and Staff are not responsible for your hurt feelings should you choose to read any of the content here.

    The OTHER forum is HERE so please stop asking.

HDB able to produce cost breakdown chart in 1981 but not now

theDoors

Alfrescian
Loyal
Joined
Oct 17, 2008
Messages
867
Points
0
hdb1981breakdown.jpg
 
The article stated " the early years where many owners were able to repay their loans within five to ten years "-compare it to now where MBT stated
30 years as the benchmark.
On this count alone, its enough to vote them out.
 
The article stated " the early years where many owners were able to repay their loans within five to ten years "-compare it to now where MBT stated
30 years as the benchmark.
On this count alone, its enough to vote them out.

Why do people have to have homes that make them locked in debts for 30 years?

I guess that's the only way the Gobermentos could keep the serfs locked into providing service to the country for the next 30 years, and they could not be mobile.

:cool:
 
To answer the thread title, this was because after 1981, the HDB changed its policy of setting the price of new flats. Instead of cost-plus, they allowed the market to determine the price, then give a reduction to first time buyers. It is this reduction that the HDB is calling a subsidy. So it became perceived price-minus.

This means that each year, the price will be higher than the last, even with the 'subsidy'.

That was the start of the phenomenal climb in prices and buyer's anguish and the rest was history.
 
http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/singaporelocalnews/view/1033446/1/.html

Mr Lee was also asked for his take on a recent media report that at least three opposition parties were eyeing National Development Minister Mah Bow Tan's ward with the aim of making public housing affordability an election issue.

He explained: "What is affordabilty? From the point of view of the buyer? And the government that is subsidising you? The government has to price it at a level that is fair to the revenue it is collecting and fair to the individual, not only the present buyer but past and future buyers. If Mr Mah is unable to defend himself, he deserves to lose.

"No country in the world has given its citizens and families an asset as valuable as what we have given every family here. And if you say that policy is at fault, you must be daft."

I am sure Mr Mah can produce a simple table like what Mr Teh did, to refute all his critics.
 
Whose pay is higher, Mr Mah or Mr Teh, after adjusted for inflation?
 
Don't know about u guys but it took me 15 yrs to finally settley HDB loans. What about u guys how long did it take you to settle your loans and become debt free?
 
I hope to do it within 5 years by renting out a room and saving most of me and wife's salaries. Really dun wan to be slave for 30 years.
 
It's very dangerous to produce such charts according to past experience with ministerial sucide thereafter.
 
I hope to do it within 5 years by renting out a room and saving most of me and wife's salaries. Really dun wan to be slave for 30 years.

Have you thought about buying some blue chips to accelerate the process of paying off your debts.
 
well done the doors,

you give veri good information to local sporns, young and old.

about the land cost----actually the land is a stateland which belongs to the public. PAP add in this land cost is totally ridiculous.

imagine one block got 200 families----then is about 3 to 5 million for a small pc of land.

HDB buy land from SLA?
 
Indeed, the whole concept of high-rise living is to reduce cost of living in land-scarce environment. Instead the PAPee traitors use it to squeeze the most out of Sporns. The PAPee TRAITORS MUST BE THROWN OUT in the next GE! Let's DO IT!
 
Indeed, the whole concept of high-rise living is to reduce cost of living in land-scarce environment. Instead the PAPee traitors use it to squeeze the most out of Sporns. The PAPee TRAITORS MUST BE THROWN OUT in the next GE! Let's DO IT!

Sounds like we, SPORNS, SERFS, PEONS, are like KAMJIA or SUGARCANES of the PAPPIES, one round of juicing for HDB... jiat lat jiat lat.... in debts of 30 years... no question about it...

Next daily KAMJIA juicing again for those who have cars that go through the now, almost compulsory ERP systems which I call it "Everyday Rob People" System.

Then, not forgetting the hefty road taxes, and bogus certificate of entitlement... KNNCCB, with that kind of money, you can buy two more cars!

And electricity bills, water bills, gas bills, another round of KAMJIA juicing....

When your children grow up... need higher education, KAMJIA juicing again... one of the most expensive places for education.

Not to mention competition of job opportunities from KNNCCB FTs, and also unfair competition from goberman's agencies when your business proof to be overwhelmingly profitable...

what happened? :eek:
 
This is a good history dig up news!!!
Should show awareness in various forums!

Alot of youngsters didnt know that.


:D :oIo: :D
 
Maboro Tan was an arrogant prick who is NOT ACCOUNTABLE to peasants because he need only to please Old Autocrat.

He order the baboons at Housing Mafia to stonewall peasants' requests or demands to know the actual cost of pigeonhole construction.

This is only possible in a procedural democracy riddled with Dynastic Politics.
 
Maboro Tan was an arrogant prick who is NOT ACCOUNTABLE to peasants because he need only to please Old Autocrat.

He order the baboons at Housing Mafia to stonewall peasants' requests or demands to know the actual cost of pigeonhole construction.

This is only possible in a procedural democracy riddled with Dynastic Politics.

Well, sad to say that now, SGP is nothing but an Imperialism under the disguise of democratic meritorious capitalism...

But truly it's more of an Imperialism hidden in under a Socialist System...

From my little knowledge of political advancement for civilization...

First, it's Fueduelism... next, Imperialism / Dynastical, Democratic, Capitalism, Socialist, and finally Communist (What Carl Marx wrote is true...)

But many people on earth got the message wrong from Carl Marx...

I believe that for communism to work, there need to have a basic capitalism structure first, where everyone have their fill of all sorts of needs from goods and services first, then people could truly progress to socialism... and when most people have achieved to a state of equality in goods and services distribution, only then Communism of the highest order could be achieved....

Only then could there be world peace where everyone is working towards a common goal...

But... bringing back to the point... I think we are all being shoot back to the Dynastic Era, with everyone's Goods and Services being priced so high, and have no choice but to pay hefty price to get it...

what really happened here? what happen to the national pledge?

why can't people live with a lower cost of living, and a higher standard of living? why everything have to be just money money money?:confused:
 
Quote:
http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stori...033446/1/.html

Mr Lee was also asked for his take on a recent media report that at least three opposition parties were eyeing National Development Minister Mah Bow Tan's ward with the aim of making public housing affordability an election issue.

He explained: "What is affordabilty? From the point of view of the buyer? And the government that is subsidising you? The government has to price it at a level that is fair to the revenue it is collecting and fair to the individual, not only the present buyer but past and future buyers. If Mr Mah is unable to defend himself, he deserves to lose.

"No country in the world has given its citizens and families an asset as valuable as what we have given every family here. And if you say that policy is at fault, you must be daft."

Something is not right. There must be some conspiracy!!
They are both PAP leh, they exist as one entity, how would they be giving conflicting statements? Don't think they have made a mistake, in fact they say this for a reason.
 
Whose pay is higher, Mr Mah or Mr Teh, after adjusted for inflation?

Teh pay is lower, but his "BENEfits" were higher, that is why, old man spoke to him, he had FITS.....and took his own life.:D
 
Despite having questionable conduct, Mr Teh produced a simple table to illustrate the costs of contruction.

Mr Mah who is paid millions is unable to such a simple table.
 
http://www.straitstimes.com/BreakingNews/Singapore/Story/STIStory_484474.html

NATIONAL Development Minister Mah Bow Tan on Saturday criticised an election strategy of opposition parties, saying they should focus on how they can best serve the people rather than to make him the focus of their campaign.

'A general election (GE) is not about me, an individual minister or an individual MP. It's really about the residents themselves.

'I offer myself up for election because I believe that I can do the best and the most for them. But ultimately it's for the residents, the people to decide,' he said at an event where he handed out hongbao to the needy in Tampines. He was responding for the first time to a Straits Times report that the five-member group representation constituency (GRC) he helms as anchor minister was being eyed by several opposition parties as a potential battleground in the next GE, due by February 2012. They are the National Solidarity Party, Workers' Party, Singapore Democratic Party and Reform Party.

The key reason is Mr Mah. His ministry oversees public housing, an issue they hope to exploit by attacking the affordability of HDB flats, whose prices have been rising. The minister acknowledged some people may be adversely affected by the housing policies. But he pointed out: 'There's no question that our policies are designed for the good of the people.

'While there may be certain parts of the policies that are not favourable, overall, I think these policies are for the well-being of the people and are good for the country.'

Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew had weighed in on the issue last week. He said at a housing conference that if Mr Mah was unable to defend his housing policy, 'he deserves to lose' at the next GE.
 
Back
Top