only PAP and the elites are allow to make big money, sinkies are not suppose to make big capital gain. Understand!!!!!!!
Why WP's ideas are flawed: Mah
National Development Minister Mah Bow Tan yesterday gave three reasons why the Workers' Party's proposal to lower new flat prices by pegging them to median incomes rather than market forces is flawed
FIRST, the WP's proposal to price HDB new flats much lower than current levels will devalue existing flats.
If new flat prices are significantly lowered, more flat buyers will buy new flats instead of resale flats. This will cause prices of resale flats to fall.
First- and second-time home buyers who buy resale flats constituted over half (17,000 out of 32,000, or 53 per cent) of total resale transactions in 2010. They are eligible to buy new flats from HDB.
If we depress new flat prices, many of them will switch to buying new flats. This will lengthen waiting time for all new flat buyers and depress prices of resale flats. This must impact the flat values of the existing one million HDB home owners, and sooner rather than later.
Second, the WP is against the asset enhancement policy.
It blames HDB's upgrading programmes for pushing up flat prices. The PAP's home ownership and rejuvenation programmes - such as Remaking Our Heartland, Lift Upgrading Programme (LUP), Home Improvement Programme (HIP) and Neighbourhood Renewal Programme (NRP) - have made the HDB flat an asset, whose value appreciates in tandem with our economic growth.
In recent years, the Government has incurred deficits of about $1 billion each year in the home ownership programme and committed another $1 billion each year in rejuvenation programmes to benefit Singaporeans.
Why is the WP against upgrading programmes which enhance the value of Singaporeans' homes, and enable the people to enjoy the fruits of Singapore's progress? Why does the WP want to push down the value of all existing HDB flats?
Finally, the WP's proposal to lower flat prices by paying less for the land is an illegal raid on our reserves.
Under our Constitution, after every general election, the new Government is required to manage its expenditure based on its current revenue during its term in office.
It cannot use assets which have been accumulated under previous governments, unless the Elected President (EP) agrees. These assets are reserves protected by the EP for future generations of Singaporeans. This system was put in to prevent a profligate government spending money which it had not accumulated.
State land forms part of the reserves protected by the EP. When the Government takes state land from the reserves to use, for example for public housing, it has to pay the full value of the land back into the reserves, to replace the land which it has used.
This land value is determined by the Chief Valuer, according to objective market conditions and established valuation principles. In this case, it is valued for public housing, which is already lower than for private housing.
The Government cannot arbitrarily price state land higher or lower as it pleases. Nor can it appoint a Chief Valuer to do its bidding, because the Chief Valuer's appointment is protected, and subject to the approval of the EP.
Paying less for land to build flats is thus not a casual matter of 'left pocket to right pocket' as the WP have put it, but of raiding our reserves (contrary to our Constitution), which are meant for future generations, and spending the money on ourselves now. This is precisely what the EP was created to prevent.
Not coincidentally, the WP manifesto also advocates abolishing the EP. Its motive is clearly to remove the constitutional safeguards, so that it can raid the reserves to fund irresponsible spending. Is this what the WP means when it offers itself as a 'responsible' alternative to the PAP?'
AGAINST PROGRESS?
'Why is the WP against upgrading programmes which enhance the value of Singaporeans' homes, and enable the people to enjoy the fruits of Singapore's progress? Why does the WP want to push down the value of all existing HDB flats?'
National Development Minister Mah Bow Tan, questioning the WP's proposal to lower flat prices
Why WP's ideas are flawed: Mah
National Development Minister Mah Bow Tan yesterday gave three reasons why the Workers' Party's proposal to lower new flat prices by pegging them to median incomes rather than market forces is flawed
FIRST, the WP's proposal to price HDB new flats much lower than current levels will devalue existing flats.
If new flat prices are significantly lowered, more flat buyers will buy new flats instead of resale flats. This will cause prices of resale flats to fall.
First- and second-time home buyers who buy resale flats constituted over half (17,000 out of 32,000, or 53 per cent) of total resale transactions in 2010. They are eligible to buy new flats from HDB.
If we depress new flat prices, many of them will switch to buying new flats. This will lengthen waiting time for all new flat buyers and depress prices of resale flats. This must impact the flat values of the existing one million HDB home owners, and sooner rather than later.
Second, the WP is against the asset enhancement policy.
It blames HDB's upgrading programmes for pushing up flat prices. The PAP's home ownership and rejuvenation programmes - such as Remaking Our Heartland, Lift Upgrading Programme (LUP), Home Improvement Programme (HIP) and Neighbourhood Renewal Programme (NRP) - have made the HDB flat an asset, whose value appreciates in tandem with our economic growth.
In recent years, the Government has incurred deficits of about $1 billion each year in the home ownership programme and committed another $1 billion each year in rejuvenation programmes to benefit Singaporeans.
Why is the WP against upgrading programmes which enhance the value of Singaporeans' homes, and enable the people to enjoy the fruits of Singapore's progress? Why does the WP want to push down the value of all existing HDB flats?
Finally, the WP's proposal to lower flat prices by paying less for the land is an illegal raid on our reserves.
Under our Constitution, after every general election, the new Government is required to manage its expenditure based on its current revenue during its term in office.
It cannot use assets which have been accumulated under previous governments, unless the Elected President (EP) agrees. These assets are reserves protected by the EP for future generations of Singaporeans. This system was put in to prevent a profligate government spending money which it had not accumulated.
State land forms part of the reserves protected by the EP. When the Government takes state land from the reserves to use, for example for public housing, it has to pay the full value of the land back into the reserves, to replace the land which it has used.
This land value is determined by the Chief Valuer, according to objective market conditions and established valuation principles. In this case, it is valued for public housing, which is already lower than for private housing.
The Government cannot arbitrarily price state land higher or lower as it pleases. Nor can it appoint a Chief Valuer to do its bidding, because the Chief Valuer's appointment is protected, and subject to the approval of the EP.
Paying less for land to build flats is thus not a casual matter of 'left pocket to right pocket' as the WP have put it, but of raiding our reserves (contrary to our Constitution), which are meant for future generations, and spending the money on ourselves now. This is precisely what the EP was created to prevent.
Not coincidentally, the WP manifesto also advocates abolishing the EP. Its motive is clearly to remove the constitutional safeguards, so that it can raid the reserves to fund irresponsible spending. Is this what the WP means when it offers itself as a 'responsible' alternative to the PAP?'
AGAINST PROGRESS?
'Why is the WP against upgrading programmes which enhance the value of Singaporeans' homes, and enable the people to enjoy the fruits of Singapore's progress? Why does the WP want to push down the value of all existing HDB flats?'
National Development Minister Mah Bow Tan, questioning the WP's proposal to lower flat prices
