4 Things Rich People Should Stop Saying

Business

The Independent

-

January 5, 2014

I have nothing against rich people. Hell, I’m hoping to become rich too. And if you ask around, some people would place me in…would place me in the “not poor” category, let’s leave it at that. But that being said, I want to point out that there are some seriously annoying rich people in this country. Not because they have money, but because they like to say the following crap. If you’re one of them, please stop it:

Actually, the city lights are off. That’s the glint of money.

1. If You’re Not Rich, It’s Your Own Fault

Ah, the meritocracy argument. The belief that effort always correlates to success.

This belief conveniently ignores context. See, certain professions pay better at different times and places. If this were the 1940s, for example, my pay as a writer would kick seven shades of faeces out of a movie director. And if we were in the Middle Ages, we’d probably point at doctors and say “That’s what happens when you don’t study hard“.

Now, let’s look at 21st century Singapore: No matter how much effort a mechanic, cleaner, or childcare teacher puts in, that person will not earn more than an investment banker.

That isn’t necessarily because investment bankers work harder, or somehow contribute more to society (in fact, the closer to manual labour a job is, the more likely it is to directly benefit society). It’s just that the current economy makes banking a more profitable trade.

If we can save the company $5 million, we might get an extra sandwich at lunch.

The investment bankers, like the app developers who work five hours a week, happened to be in the right place at the right time. They’re rich partly due to circumstance, and not because they’re inherently superior beings launched from Krypton.

I’m not suggesting they didn’t do any work to get there. Or that they don’t have talent. I’m just saying they need to acknowledge it’s not just will, but also circumstance (including educational opportunities) that gave them their success. And maybe following us on Facebook, because we talk about career upgrading all the time.

And that sometimes, people can’t succeed because they’re in the wrong place or time. Not because they don’t try as hard.

2. Mocking the Amount of Money Involved in Scandals

When a scandal hits the front page, there’s a lot of public indignation. Maybe someone seriously overpaid for bicycles, or the director of a charity fund decides “Hey, you know what would help impoverished kidney patients? A golden tap in my office.”

When that happens, we’re all shaken. It ruins our trust in charities, government bodies, etc. But then a small percentage of our population (typically the rich) will say something stupid. Stuff like:

“Come on, $X dollars only? That sort of money is nothing! Why are you people getting worked up over what is, to me, a tiny amount?”

It gets even worse when backed by arguments like:

$2,000+ is an okay price for a bicycle. I mean, who can’t afford to pay that money for a bit of convenience?
Compared to how much swindler X made for charity / the government / a company, the money he took is no big deal

Those arguments are (1) a slap in the face, and (2) missing the point.

Eh, I provide a LOT of policemen with jobs okay? Now put the money in the bag.

A few thousand, or hundred thousand, is not a small amount of money. It might seem that way, if you have a District 9 condo worth a Saudi Prince’s harem.

But for many Singaporeans, an amount like $57,000 could pay their HDB loan for years. When rich people roll their eyes at the “trivial” amounts, it’s no less than a wealthy, fat tourist waving a a drumstick at hungry villagers. We’re happy you’re rich and all, but you don’t have to act like a contemptuous dic…person.

Second, we’re not outraged at the amount of money involved. We get that, when someone commits a commercial crime, it isn’t so he can buy a $2 Slurpee. We’re outraged at the betrayal of trust.

It’s not about whether $10,000 or $10 was wrongfully taken. The point is that it was wrongfully taken. If your 10 year old son steals $20 out your wallet, how would you feel? Betrayed and alarmed? Or would you laugh and say “Hell, it’s just $20?”

That’s what we’re pissed about. And that’s why rich people need to lay off the “He may have stolen $X, but he made $Y” argument. It misses the point.

3. Dispensing Advice That Only Other Rich People Can Use

“Well if it takes that long to maintain the building, you ought to hire yourself a secretary.”

Rich people who were born poor will never do this. But Singapore is home to the occasional heir, who never had to earn his money. And when that person gives advice, I cringe.

Mostly, the advice sounds like this:

Poor Man: I don’t even have a bowl of Yong Tau Foo, I’m starving man.

Rich Brat: Then why don’t you drink some Bird’s Nest? It’s very filling.

Other examples are:

Suggesting your relieve stress by taking a one month holiday, and not understanding why you can’t do this
Wondering why you won’t go on an all salmon diet and sign up for a $3,000 Yoga class, when it’s for your own health
Asking why you don’t just “take a cab there”. Every. Damn. Time.
Suggesting you cure your poverty by investing in property or gold. Because he thinks someone who makes $1,200 a month is in a position to do this.

Look, if you inherited money, congratulations. We’re all happy for you. But if you’re going to walk around dispensing advice, may I suggest you listen first?

Perhaps if you spent less time talking, and more time understanding the issues of the less fortunate, you’d be able to make a real contribution.

4. Saying That Money Trickles Down, Even if You Won’t Invest in Us

Think of it as importing gold, except it walks, talks, and has a worse attitude.

Do you invest in local start-ups? Contribute a lot to charity? If you do, you sort of have a right to use the “trickle down” argument.

But you need to realize some rich people are just here to stash money, or for the tax breaks. Or to buy our property. And that money doesn’t “trickle down”. It sloshes around in their bank account, never circulating into our society.

Saying it “trickles down” is like putting a bag of plasma in my hand, and telling me if I hold it long enough I’ll have a full blood transfusion.

So if you’re one of those rich people who walk around saying: “Singaporeans suck, they have no creativity, I’ll never invest here, blah blah blah“, then stop using terms like “trickle down” or “a rising tide lifts all boats”. You do nothing for us. We’re doing you the service, by giving you a low-tax residence that you contribute diddly squat to.

Now back in the ’70s and ’80s, people didn’t put their money here because we’re a tax haven. Or because it’s easy to import cheap labour here. They came here to set up businesses and invest in our workforce, because we had the best and brightest.

They believed in us. Hell, we believed in ourselves. And as a consequence, we got richer together. Now that’s a trickle down effect. If we’re lucky, we’ll recapture that spirit.

But in the meantime rich guy, unless you actually invest in us, lay off the trickle down arguments.

What are some other things you wish rich people would shut up about? Spill the details here!

Image Credits:
jjcb, petrr, Thirteen of Clubs, jeremyfoo, jordanvuong

Source: http://www.moneysmart.sg/money-talks/things-rich-singaporeans-should-stop-saying/

Law: “A good code no longer”

Featured News

The Independent

-

January 4, 2014

0

Three law professors in a recently released book have called upon the legislature to amend and give Singapore a modernised Penal Code for the 21st century

Singapore Penal Code (SPC) is, except for a few revisions, virtually identical to the Indian Penal code (IPC) 1860. And “in sum, the Penal Code as we know it today falls short of many of the principles and objectives set by Macaulay [the principal framer of the IPC] himself, and presents the danger of continuing to perpetuate the moral judgements, values and policies of a bygone era,” wrote National University of Singapore law faculty members Chan Wing Cheong, Michael Hor and Stanley Yeo in their book, Criminal law for the 21st century: a model code for Singapore.

Calling SPC “a good code no longer”, the authors noted that while there have been a recent effort to conduct a comprehensive review of the Penal Code such as the SPC (Amendement) Act 2007, “in our view, these revisions have fallen well short of what might have been expected from the ‘most comprehensive review undertaken since 1984’”.

Revising the SPC

The professors proposed that one way, which they claim will not examine the foundational structure and conceptual underpinnings of the SPC, is to tidy up the “19th century legal instrument” with revisions in ambiguities, gaps and inconsistencies, and modernise the language used.

“But the best method of conducting this exercise [revising an antiquated Penal Code by re-examining whether the general principles of criminal responsibility corresponds with contemporary thinking about the subject matter] is to produce a ‘General Part’ for the SPC,” they wrote adding, “this Part will contain the foundational principles of criminal responsibility which are generally applicable to all offences, including those found outside the Penal Code.”

“The General Part will significantly revitalise the Penal Code and restore many of its original technical attributes,” said the authors. “We make a specific call upon our legislatures to commit themselves to a modernised Penal Code for the 21st century.”

Call from other quarters

Workers’ Party (WP) chairman and member of parliament for Aljunied Group Representative Constituency Sylvia Lim, in her speech on the Penal Code (Amendment) Bill last year, called on the government to look at the broader structure of the homicide provisions as a wider law reform exercise.

“We inherited our Penal Code from our colonial days, and the drafting of the homicide provisions has been criticised by no less than eminent jurist, Sir James Fitzjames Stephen, who drafted our Criminal Procedure Code. He labelled our homicide provisions as the ‘weakest’ part of the Penal Code, calling them ‘obscure’ and ‘not fully thought out’. His criticisms were several. Homicide itself has not been defined in the Penal Code, except in the context of culpable homicide; murder is a species of culpable homicide; the definitions of murder and culpable homicide also closely resemble each other, such that it is difficult to distinguish between them. For instance, a person intending to cause injury which is sufficient to cause death is a murderer, but a person intending to cause injury likely to cause death commits culpable homicide not amounting to murder,” said Lim.

Review under way

K Shanmugam, minister for law, informed the Parliament during the Committee of Supply Debates 2013 that “a law reform committee led by Senior Minister of State Indranee Rajah will be looking at rationalising Penal Code offences relating to homicide and hurt where death is caused; and whether and to what extent mentally disabled offenders should be punished differently, across the whole spectrum of criminal law”.

His ministry administers over 80 Acts – about 20% of the Statute Book, which the ministry reviews and seek to reform from time to time, Shanmugam said.

“A number of reforms were made in the last financial year. Looking at criminal justice, the Evidence Act was amended to expand the court’s discretion to admit hearsay and opinion evidence. As regards sexual assault victims, we made it clear that cross-examination on sexual history can only be done when directly relevant. Together with Ministry of Home Affairs and Attorney General’s Chambers, we worked on and brought before this House, reforms to the mandatory death penalty, in respect to drug trafficking and murder as well as the procedure for the Court of Appeal to review death sentences. The transitional cases are now being dealt with. We will monitor the impact on our crime rates as a result of these changes,” he added.

History of administration of justice in Singapore

Sir Stamford Raffles founded Singapore on February 6, 1819, which can be taken as the starting point of Singapore’s modern legal system. Till 1826, no explicit laws were created, hence the island was being governed by Raffles via a code of law formulated by him called Raffles Regulations. On March 20, 1827, the long-awaited Second Charter of Justice was implemented, which extended the jurisdiction of the Recorder’s Court at Penang to Melacca, Singapore and all present or future dependencies of the Straits Government.

This was significant not only in establishing the Court of Judicature, but also for its implicit importation of English Law. Although post-1826, developments in the common law made by English courts do not apply to Singapore unless it is accepted as part of Singapore’s law by a Singapore court.

After 1858, the British Crown took direct control of the Strait Settlements. Later, in 1867, the Government of the Straits Settlements Act was passed, which formed a Legislative Council responsible for all law-making activities in Singapore. This continued till the Second World War.

After independence, the Constitution became supreme in Singapore. From 1965 to 1979, the Constitution of Singapore was found in three separate documents: the State Constitution of 1963, the Republic of Singapore Independence Act (RSIA) and provisions of the Federation of Malaysia Constitution imported through the RSIA.

In 1979, Parliament amended the Constitution to empower the Attorney-General (AG) to prepare a consolidated Constitution and publish it as a reprint. The last reprint of the Constitution was published in 1999 by the AG.

Notably, in 1993, the Parliament passed the Application of English Law Act to “declare the extent to which English law is applicable in Singapore”.

Also, like most common law countries, judicial precedents are a major source of law in Singapore too. This is the principle of stare decisis or commonly referred – doctrine of binding precedent. Under this, the High Court continues to be bound by the decisions of the Court of Appeal as well as old Privy Council decisions.

Source: Law and legal institutions of Asia: Traditions, adaptations and innovations; Cambridge University Press

7 Staging Tricks To Increase Your Flat’s Resale Price

Business

The Independent

-

January 4, 2014

0

7 Staging Tricks To Increase Your Flat’s Resale Price

There are few times in a man’s life when it’s acceptable to cry – holding his child for the first time, beating cancer, or seeing the resale value of his flat this year. With demand flatter than a cheap pancake, you need every possible way to beat the low valuation. Here’s how:

What is Staging?

“Staging” a flat means setting it up to look good, usually for prospective buyers. Staging is why showroom flats, or apartments in design magazines, look so damn ritzy in pictures.

Some property agents know how to stage flats; ask and they might have someone in their agency handling it. Otherwise, there are also photographers and interior design students who do this for a small fee. If you want to bypass all of them though, you can get by on seven basic rules:

1. Set the Dining Table

Before viewers arrive, set the dining table. Pile on the plates, flowers, candle stands, etc. If you look at the table and feel like ordering tea and crumpets in a fake British accent, you’ve done it right.

Sales designer Terry Xiu also suggests that you:

“Position the dining table near a window if possible. Make all the furniture of the same set; don’t mix up different types of chairs. You can also position a mirror near the dining table, so the dining space looks more big and open.”

2. Track Lighting and Uplights

Buy some track lights (anywhere from $15 to $50), which are basically rows of little lights that can be individually angled. Place them in strips along the floor, or along the ceiling, and angle the light toward big ornaments – large family photographs, paintings, a grandfather clock, etc.

“Lighting directs the viewer’s gaze, and what they pay attention to when they first enter the room,” Terry says, “You want to control the viewer’s eyeballs. You want them to see how beautiful your feature wall is, or how nice the side table can look in the corner.

It can also be distraction. You can move their eyes away from the crack in the ceiling, or from the scratches on the flooring.”

Terry also suggests you purchase uplights (lamp-stands that project light toward the ceiling) instead of using the regular lights.

“Uplights are softer. Regular down-lighting is usually quite glaring, and it can make the place look very clinical.”

3. Move Furniture Away From the Walls, if You Can

It’s common practice to shove desks and sofas against the wall. But if you can pull the furniture toward a central area, and away from the walls, it will make the flat look bigger.

If the central area is carpeted though, pay attention to how the furniture rests on the carpet.

“If you cluster furniture in a central area, rest all the furniture from the same set on the carpet – don’t leave one or two chairs on the carpet, and one or two off it,” Terry says, “at least the front two legs of each chair should be on the carpet.”

4. Don’t Neglect the Front Door

“Ignoring the front door is the most common mistake,” Terry says, “When there are viewers coming, be sure to clear out all the shoes, and throw out worn out welcome mats.

Make sure the front door is properly painted, and you may want to move any religious icons or big potted plants for the time being, so the area doesn’t look cluttered.

I will usually put a ‘greeter’ at the front door, like a small side table with some flowers; or if there is a wall facing the front door, maybe hang some art or a family photograph.”

Terry adds that a bad impression at the front door might “linger”, and psychologically make the rest of the interior seem less polished.

5. Paint the Grouting in Toilets and Kitchens

The grouting is the space between tiles. In toilets and kitchens, it tends to be the home of dirt, moss, and various indigenous life forms.

“Even if the surfaces are clean and everything works, dirty gaps between the tiles will make the place look run down,” Terry says, “I will usually get a small pot of white paint, and just paint over the grouting. The white lines can also make the tiled surface look brighter and cleaner.“

6. Slap on a Uniform Paint Job

To make the flat seem bigger, make sure the wall colour in the main area is uniform. This gives the impression of a large continuous space, rather than a collection of smaller rooms.

“If there are no partitions or dividing walls, and the living area is the same space as the kitchen and dining room, I suggest painting all these walls the same colour,” Terry says, “if you paint the kitchen-half yellow and the living room-half sky blue, you can establish that they are two separate areas, yes. But when you separate the space like that, you actually make the overall flat size seem smaller.”

7. Don’t Make It Look Lived In

The idea of staging a resale flat is to make it seem like a flashy new condo-unit – not like a crash pad in which you’ve been guzzling beer and playing Xbox in sweaty underpants for years. And since you’re going to sell, you may as well begin the emotional detachment by clearing stuff out.

“The less clutter, the bigger and more appealing the space will look,” Terry says, “So remove all your personal belongings from the tables and chairs when people come to view. In the toilet, don’t leave soap with all the hair in the soap dish, or half-squeezed toothpaste tubes around the sink.

It’s inconvenient, but the fact is that personal clutter can destroy the effect of even the best interior design.”

And once you’ve done all this, you’re ready to move to negotiation tactics for getting the highest cash premium. Follow us on Facebook for more on that!

Have you had any other good staging tactics that have worked? Share your secrets with us here!

Image Credits:
lucasfoxbcn

Baffling, alarming, revealing.

Featured News

The Independent

-

January 3, 2014

0

By Leong Sze Hian

What these statistics tell about Singapore..

Statistics that baffle

An increasing number of foreigners are coming as tourists to look for jobs in Singapore. Foe example, tourist arrivals from the Philippines saw an increase of 24.5 per cent to 678,000 from 2010 to 2011. Just for the first six months of last year alone, the number is already 358,000. Media reports say that such tourists have been able to extend their tourist visas to as long as four months to secure jobs. My, my …what is going on here?

Statistics that reveal

It looks like foreign workers’ levies are hitting record highs. Foreign workers’ levies and fees are estimated to hit $3 billion in 2013. It was $2.6 billion in 2011. This may cause prices charged to consumers to increase, and arguably also depress wages for both foreigners and Singaporeans. Where is all this money going?

Statistics that are ridiculous

We are hitting a record … for the wrong reason. After adjusting for PPP (Purchasing Power Parity) and using the same PPP in the Fare Review Mechanism Committee’s report, the monthly cost for unlimited travel on public transport passes in Hong Kong, London, New York and Tokyo is S$72 plus, S$162, S$116 and S$100 respectively. This makes these countries about 60, 15, 39 and 47 per cent cheaper than Singapore’s monthly pass at S$190. Yet, the transport operators are still applying for fare increases. Now if this is not ridiculous, I don’t know what else is.

My favourite statistic

The price of the cheapest two-room flat in Sengkang increased by 22 per cent, from $68,000 (June 2010) to $83,000 (January 2012). The latest BTO flat in Sengkang saw an increase in the two-room flat’s price to $91,000 (Fernvale Lea) and $107,000 (Rivervale Arc) in July 2013. This is an increase of about 34 to 57 per cent in the three years from June 2010 to July 2013, or an increase of about 10.2 to 16.3 per cent per annum. Can the government continue to use “affordable housing” as a badge of honour?

Statistics that sadden

Singapore has the largest wage disparity when compared with workers of different educational levels in all the high-income countries. The poorest 20 per cent in Singapore have only 5 per cent of the share of all income while the richest 20 per cent have 49 per cent of the share of all income in 1998 – the largest disparity among the high-income countries. How did we come to this situation?

Statistics that alarm

Low-wage workers in Singapore earn the lowest wages compared to those in the Nordic countries, the median wage of Singaporean is also the lowest among these countries. And more are remaining unemployed longer — at least 25 weeks — compared to a year ago, in particular those with post-secondary qualifications. According to the Manpower Ministry’s labour market report for the third quarter of 2013, the long-term unemployment rate as of September was 0.6 per cent — 12,500 residents — up from 0.4 per cent a year ago. Our founding fathers, wherever they are, must be shaking their heads in disbelief.

Replacing Ho Ching…what is the problem?

Featured News

The Independent

-

January 3, 2014

0

By Augustine Low

Warren Buffett and Ho Ching have seemingly nothing in common.

One is widely considered the most successful investor of the 20^th century and consistently ranked among the world’s wealthiest people. The other is the CEO of Temasek Holdings and the wife of Singapore’s Prime Minister.

But the two share one clear distinguishing trait – both have been subject to the same speculation and scrutiny for years, revolving around their successor.

For over a decade now, questions have been asked – and countless media articles written – about when Buffett, Chairman and CEO of Berkshire Hathaway, will name a successor.

Almost nine years ago, back in 2005, it was reported that the Board of Temasek Holdings had initiated the process of CEO succession as part of a disciplined governance system. At that point in time, Ho Ching had been CEO of Temasek for three years.

Four years later, in March 2009, Chip Goodyear was roped in to be on the Board, and then to take over from Ho Ching as CEO by October that year. But Goodyear resigned abruptly just three months before he was due to be CEO.

Beyond a joint statement from Temasek and Goodyear saying “there are differences regarding certain strategic issues that could not be resolved”, no other reason was given for the succession scrap, despite intense questioning in Parliament.

Since then, questions about Ho Ching’s successor have cropped up regularly. It seems that the search is perennially on.

When Lim Boon Heng took over from S Dhanabalan as Temasek Chairman in August last year, he reiterated that the CEO search was an ongoing process, adding “it is a very, very intense and time-consuming exercise”.

Let’s turn to potential reasons why the search has been so formidable and fruitless.

Repercussions of the Goodyear break-up: The failed succession attempt with Goodyear could have deterred candidates from taking up the hot seat. Did he ruffle feathers? Whose? Why? How? Was it so difficult for him to acclimatise himself to Temasek’s corporate culture? It could also have made Temasek feel that it had no room to fail the second time around – hence the need for total certainty with its next candidate.

Short on details, high on demands: Temasek is a famously secretive organisation; there is a code of silence surrounding it. So candidates aspiring to take over from Ho Ching will have their work cut out knowing exactly what the job entails and how onerous the demands are. It does not help that Ho Ching as CEO has been media-shy – Temasek is one of the very few corporations where the non-executive Chairman is more of a public figure than the CEO. So it becomes really trying looking for precedents and clues to how the CEO has been performing.

Hard act to follow: David Moyes has found that succeeding Alex Ferguson at Manchester United has not been a walk in the park. Succeeding a big name, with big connections, is never easy. Anyone succeeding Ho Ching knows that he or she is stepping into shoes that are hard to fill, whether by reputation or by deliverables. Not to mention that there will possibly be an omnipresent shadow lurking in the background.

Dynamics between CEO and Board: Temasek has a high-powered Board. It’s hard to judge what say the Board members have in the day-to-day running of the company. One thing’s for sure – the CEO has to be skilled enough to work with a team of independent-minded Board members. Does the CEO merely play a passive role and collaborate and carry out strategy devised by the Board? The CEO-Board dynamics could prove every bit as challenging as it looks on paper.

Whatever the reasons are that make the search for a CEO difficult, it isn’t the case that Singaporeans are eager to see Ho Ching give way to a successor. The fact is that Temasek itself has been talking about a CEO successor since 2005.

So we are talking about a fruitless CEO search for close to nine years now! Making it probably the most tedious and prolonged CEO search in Singapore’s history, and in global terms, even rivaling that of Warren Buffett.

Will 2014 be the year that Temasek will succeed in this CEO mission?

3 Policy Changes That Would Seriously Improve the HDB Loan

Business

The Independent

-

January 2, 2014

0

3 Policy Changes That Would Seriously Improve the HDB Loan

The HDB concessionary loan is supposed to make housing affordable – an objective it fulfilled until interest rates plunged. Then suddenly, the interest on a HDB loan rose way above that of a bank loan. It’s a flaw that needs correcting, and it probably shouldn’t have carried on for almost 10 years. Here’s our opinion on the tweaks needed:

Does the HDB Loan Make Housing Affordable?

The big advantage of a HDB loan is the down-payment. You only need to put down 10% of the flat’s price (minus any Cash-over-Valuation). A bank loan, however, requires at least 20% down. Down payments for a HDB loan can also come from your CPF, whereas the bank requires cold, hard cash.

So far so good. The problem is with the loan interest rates:

The typical bank loan has an interest rate based on an index, such as SIBOR, plus the bank’s spread (an additional amount that differs between banks). So as SIBOR moves up or down, the loan’s interest rate will fluctuate accordingly. At present, the rate is around 1.7%.

(If you want to check the banks’ different interest rates, you can do it for free on SmartLoans.sg.)

The HDB loan has an interest rate based on the prevailing CPF interest rate, plus 0.1%. At present, that’s around 2.6%. So yes, the HDB loan charges you way more interest.

We think some improvements are in order:

Peg Interest Rates to Household Income
Simply Lower HDB Rates in Prolonged Low Interest Environments
Offer a Low Interest Reno Loan Complement

1. Peg Interest Rates to Household Income

When you buy a HDB flat, your various housing grants are based on your household income. So it’s beyond us why HDB interest rates aren’t.

Rather than use the CPF interest rate, we should use a progressive system. The HDB loan rate will increase along with the average household income. For example:

Household Income – $2,000 or under (0.9%)

– $2,001 to $4,000 (1.2%)

– $4,001 to $6,000 (1.7%)

All numbers are speculative, but you get the idea. The financial burden varies according to what each family can handle.

2. Simply Lower HDB Rates in Prolonged Low Interest Environments

When banks charge less interest than the public housing board, it always looks a bit ridiculous; like a soup kitchen charging more than the restaurant next door.

But you know what? We’d actually say that’s okay if it was a short term thing. If the bank rates dip below HDB rates for a year or two, we’d be the first to shrug and say hey, you win some, you lose some. That’s the bank borrower’s reward for taking a more volatile option.

But bank rates have been far lower than HDB rates for almost a decade. In this prolonged low-interest environment, HDB’s higher rates are just helping to further divide the wealthier borrowers – who can afford higher down-payments and qualify for bank loans – from the poorer ones.

HDB should devise a policy for lowering its interest rates, should a low interest environment persist for five years or more.

3. Offer a Low Interest Reno Loan Complement

Unless you subscribe to the Ryan Ong School of Interior Design (i.e. the ideal placement for anything is where it lands when I throw it on the floor), you’ll want some furniture and stuff.

That’s why after getting a HDB loan, most home owners go right out and get a $30,000 renovation loan. It’s kind of a necessity for some, so HDB should have its own low (or dare we say NO) interest renovation loan. This should be an option for lower income families, who don’t have much credit left after taking on a home loan.

How would you change the HDB concessionary loan if you could? Comment and let us know!

Image Credits:
∅null

Source: http://www.moneysmart.sg/home-loans/3-policy-changes-that-would-seriously-improve-the-hdb-loan/

Singapore’s funeral industry and the New Burial System

Lifestyle

The Independent

-

January 2, 2014

0

Singapore’s funeral industry and the New Burial System

They do everything. From funeral pre-planning to will writing and grief counselling, from supplies to professional embalming and make-up, from food and floral arrangements to post-funeral matters such as insurance and property. They even take care of sea burials and international repatriations. There are over 60 or so funeral directors in Singapore running an industry, which conservative estimates say run in excess of $100 million. And as Singapore ages fast, analysts believe that the industry is set to grow even further.

The bigger players, which are all members of the Association of Funeral Directors (Singapore), include Ang Chin Moh (ACM) Casket, Ang Yew Seng Funeral Parlour, Singapore Casket, Casket Fairprice, Direct Singapore Funeral Services, and Trinity Casket. These have sought to revamp the industry image often associated with social stigma; introducing up-market facilities, services and membership benefits; and even open training academies to train professionals for the funeral industry. While almost all funeral operators provide packages for Buddhist and Christian funerals, some like Casket Fairprice also provide three-days funeral arrangements for Freethinkers, probably a sign of the changing times.

Some like ACM Casket have ventured into the non-profit business as well and formed the ACM Foundation, which recently organised a Design for Death competition unveiling future trends and ideas to uplift the funeral industry. Themes at the competition included biodegradable caskets, home memorials, and a cluster of honeycomb-shaped urn vaults with light-emitting diodes.

The funeral industry also has smaller but more traditional players. Notable ones are Lee Teoh Heng Undertaker, Goh Soon Moh Undertaker, and Hao Zi Funerals. They refrain from over-the-top marketing campaigns; relying instead on word of mouth publicity and traditional good will for business.

But in recent times, the funeral industry has faced manpower shortage and complaints of lack of professionalism due to no mandatory licensing scheme. Anyone with a phone can operate a funeral services by outsourcing the jobs and retaining a commission. This has led to a surge in consumer complaints in recent years. Lim Biow Chuan, president of the Consumers Association of Singapore (Case) – a non-profit organisation working for consumer protection, recently agreed with the demand for accreditation of funeral firms. While writing in The Strait Times forum, Lim added that such regularisation of the industry will “raise standards and weed out fly-by-night operators or providers of low quality services”. He also advised “consumers to look into engaging CaseTrusted companies for funeral services”.

So what are your options if and when you die in Singapore?

The National Environment Agency (NEA) is the country’s nodal agency for all matters relating to the funeral industry. After death, the body may either be buried in the Choa Chu Kang Cemetery complex – the only cemetery in Singapore still open for burials, or be cremated. The NEA introduced a New Burial System (NBS) in 2007 to replace the traditional earth burial plots with a concrete crypt sans a base and limit the burial period to 15 years. After the allotted 15 years, graves will be exhumed and the remains may either be cremated, put into a columbarium or re-buried.

There are three crematoria in Singapore, of which the Mandai Crematorium and Columbarium Complex is managed by the government, while the other two at Kong Meng San Phor Kark See Monastary and Tse Toh Aum Temple are private-managed. After cremation, the ashes of the deceased may either be stored in three government-managed columbaria – at Mandai, Yishun and Choa Chu Kang, or in more than 50 private columbaria located across the Island. The family may also scatter a small amount of ashes at the designated site located about 1.5 nautical miles south of Pulau Semakau.

For those who really want to splurge even after death, can rest their ashes in the luxurious “6-star-grade” modern columbarium with full air-conditioning, Nirvana Memorial. Situated at Old Choa Chu Kang, Nirvana “provides free exhumation service for remains relocation and has niche available from S$4,800 onwards”, according to its widely circulated advertisements. This after the news broke that about 4,153 graves in the Bukit Brown Cemetery will be exhumed to build a new dual four-lane road passing through it. The Memorial plans to sell about 20,000 niches in about 10 years time targeting mainly Buddhists, Taoists and Confucianists.

Mr Chew Geok Leong. Died 1939. Practiced TCM in Singapore at Geylang Serai Shophouse. He had prepared his coffin, tombs and statues while he was still alive.

http://newzzit.com/stories/singapores-funeral-industry-and-the-new-burial-system

Another year of quarrels?

Singapore Politics

The Independent

-

January 1, 2014

0

By Vincent Wijeysingha

At the start of a new year we try and find, in the tea leaves of events, the portents to come. We are entering an unsettled time. The US is contracting its money flows; China appears to be expanding militarily while contracting economically; India will face elections; Australia has a new untested government; and the unfortunately named PIGS countries of the European Union (Portugal, Ireland, Greece and Spain) will see the effects of their austerity packages. Thailand is on the brink of a choppy democratic year if threats of a military coup, itself not unlikely, do not come to pass.

Singapore’s economy, therefore, is not entirely safe from further tremors in the wake of the 2008 financial crisis earthquake despite last year’s 3.7 per cent growth. But then every year is a little more unstable. While the world is in an unprecedented time of peace and economic growth, it pays to look farther than the last year if we want to avoid short-term predictions.

At home, these last several years have seen celebration and mourning. We marked the golden jubilee of many iconic national institutions while bidding farewell to their founders. Lee Kuan Yew remains the last member of a Parliament he bestrode since first taking the oath of office in 1955. At this fifty year mark of nationhood (recall independence actually came in September 1963), it seems opportune to take a look at these five decades and the trends they indicate.

The period of 1959 to 1968 showed Singapore at its best and worst. The People’s Action Party established the twin axles on which it entrenched its longevity. Rapid national development benefited more and more with each passing year while, alongside, the administration developed systems of control and oppression which made it unchallengeable.

In the next period, having neutralised its challengers, the government moved to consolidate its position, winning re-election in remarkable landslides until 1980. It was also the period of the ‘digitisation’ of the electorate which, under the new labour and trade union legislation, reduced the Singaporean people to the status of supplicants in what Chan Heng Chee would later describe as a petitionary political culture The true longevity of the PAP was born there, in 1968.

In 1984, the PAP lost 13% of the vote and two seats. Lee appeared on television late in the night of 22 December and fulminated at the ingratitude of the electorate. Parliamentary innovations like the GRC system and the Elected Presidency are traced to this time. Then came Operation Spectrum and with it the silencing of a generation.

Changes in the global political economy threw up right wing leaders from Washington to Canberra (and even the Vatican). They inaugurated a period of unbridled neo-conservative economic liberalism and World Bank-led austerity measures. At home, a series of disastrous economic and social policies after 1980, from the Graduate Mothers’ Scheme to the Second Industrial Revolution, began to weaken the PAP.

For a variety of reasons, the decade of 2001 to 2011 saw, initially, a spectacular rise in the PAP’s fortunes. It won 75% of the vote in 2001 in the wake of the 9/11 incident and a massive recession. In the following two elections, its popular vote contracted by 15%.

These two years since GE2011 were a rocky road for the nation and the PAP, floundering from one policy challenge to another largely, if not entirely, encapsulated in the Population White Paper which to many was the principal symbol of a political economy gone awry and a government unwilling, or unable, to rethink its fundamentals.

As the characteristics of a demand-led economy have begun to disappear, as in many other first world countries, we began to focus on supply side measures to cheapen our costs and ensure a continued place in the global market. As a nation too small to decisively influence global industrial trends, we have remained and will remain vulnerable to worldwide capital, technological and labour movements.

2014 is a seminal year for it is the last before we celebrate the fiftieth anniversary of sovereign independence. In these fifty uninterrupted years, the PAP has developed a framework of policy themes which become the unchanging ideology of the nation: a secular market-based meritocracy offering differential rewards according to one’s economic contribution alongside a minimalist welfare safety net underscored by a depoliticised citizenry tightly controlled on a pro-wealth, anti-rights Party-voter compact.

The PAP’s biennial conference held recently hints at a party limited straining to rethink these fundamentals. Chan Chun Sing’s fighting talk suggests a movement in retreat. This too is an outcome of the programmatic fundamentals laid down by the Old Guard from which the new leadership cannot, or dares not, depart.

The first generation of leaders were opinionated and confident men who had the global conditions of the post-war on their side. Their assertive, top-down approach characterised the age. But as they stamped their personalities on the administration, they also created a closed loop whereby newer leaders coming up-stream were advanced for their allegiance to the old dispensation rather than their ability to depart from it when needed. They were cut very much from the cloth of their forbears.

Captains of industry and intellectuals shied away from politics, leaving civil servants, trade unionists, and military men to fill the void. Schooled in a tightly controlled atmosphere dominated by the Old Guard, these newcomers understood their own longevity to be guaranteed not by their allegiance to Singapore’s success but to the pathway laid down by the Old Guard. The mantra became reaction rather than reinvention. Chan Chun Sing’s speech was newsworthy not for its Churchillian prose but for its bunker-like defiance in the face on an enemy, a world the PAP has not prepared for because it made itself insulate from its voters.

The reason why Gilbert Goh’s campaign against the Population White Paper attracted so much attention was because it became a sign and symbol of the PAP’s inability to adapt or listen. It became the leitmotif of an economy and society that depends on supply side measures to maintain wealth creation that is at the root of the PAP’s compact with the electorate.

2013 began and ended with industry-related problems which must be at least suggestible of supply side weaknesses. The strike by bus drivers at the end of last year and the riot in Little India at the end of this have put our industrial policy, most visible from the standpoint of exploited low-waged workers, square in the spotlight.

At the courts, citizens have been addressing constitutional questions not hitherto raised. All of these have been midwifed at the bar by the human rights lawyer, M Ravi, who raised the legal profession’s reputation from the doldrums into which it had sunk since the Legal Professions (Amendment) Act in 1986 which muzzled and tamed the Bar. Minor but important concessions have been won. Changes have been made to the mandatory death penalty, thanks to the activists. Though nowhere near enough to qualify Singapore’s legal system as civilised, they have at least turned the courts to face the direction of the times.

But while events have forced the government’s hand, it is also taking shelter in the juridical bullying that characterised the Lee Kuan Yew era. After dropping the idea of an enforceable Internet Code of Conduct, the government introduced new internet regulations and then took several defamation and contempt actions. Finally, heavy-handed administrative obligations were placed on popular news websites, The Independent and Breakfast Network, which resulted in the demise of the latter. The government speaks now also of cyber-bullying legislation to be tabled next year which many see as an extension of moves to control the internet.

If we reflect, therefore, on the places at which the government has focussed its biggest guns, we notice three key propositions against which no dissent is brooked nor questioning allowed, ie. the social stability and the PAP’s continuing right to govern, industrial harmony, and the probity of the courts. Those who have challenged the social stability established on a system of information control that the previous SPH-MediaCorp nexus underwrote have felt the pressure of the state upon them. Migrant workers in both strike and riot have been dealt with severely with arbitrary deportations of those not convicted and accusations of police brutality whilst under interrogation. The migrant worker activists have been harassed, tailed, their phones allegedly tapped, and their internet communications monitored. Tey Tsun Hang, Alex Au, Lynn Lee and Leslie Chew have been similarly warned off against calling attention to problems in the judicial system.

With these developments in mind, what might we expect in 2014? First on the list we can confidently predict at least two things, both designed with the next general elections in mind. Further controls on the internet can be expected because, as the PM said, this is where that notional entity, the ‘unhappy Singaporean’ gets his news and shares his perspectives on politics and society. And we will see a slicker, more media savvy PAP, clearly guided by a PR company to enhance its image. Close to the election we will again encounter another Growth and Share Package, placed strategically close to the elections for maximum effect, but this is of course farther into the future. The Budget in February will foreshadow the shape of the package to come.

The government will also engage the growing NGO sector further but as we have already seen, it will focus on those approved NGOs which do not challenge its right to govern. Civil society notables less opposed to the idea of regime change will get more space and publicity while opposition politicians and the more radical activists will continue to be ignored. We can expect more public tussles on the Forum page.

It will be 45 years since the last riots on our streets. At that time we were in the throes of decolonisation and the jockeying of the Cold War, and the PAP was still an untested government whose voters were suspicious of. The years from ’68 to ’80 were the best for the administration but they sowed the seeds of our current problems because their very success have made the PAP reluctant to think anew. Ngiam Tong Dow’s critique helped to elucidate just how serious is the PAP’s inbreeding and therefore how decrepit it has, like an old aristocratic family, become. Clinging to the policy assumptions of the past may well be the PAP’s Achilles’ heel and silencing Ngiam and others like him will only postpone the inevitable soul-searching.

The coming argument will be between a more independent, educated, and informed population and a PAP intent on defending (and enlarging) the status quo. Will we as a people force it into a change of direction or will we see the intense carrot and stick approach that characterised the LKY era? 2014 will be the year that will reveal this. Gilbert Goh’s popularity, the serious contraction in SPH subscriptions and a restless population taking to the internet to vent their unhappiness are not passing phenomena that can be salved eternally with vouchers and Growth and Share packages. They warn of a deeper malaise.

Politics, Jobs and Wages in 2013/4

Singapore News

Kumaran Pillai

-

January 1, 2014

0

By Kumaran Pillai

There are two words that come to my mind when I think of politics in Singapore. It may not be apparent but if one were to reflect on it, he or she may end up with the same conclusions – it is none other than jobs and wages.

At the 6.9M population protest, I spoke to local executive who used to work for an MNC. He was making about $15k per month before he lost his job to a “better qualified foreign talent.”

Another taxi driver I spoke to said that he lost his previous job to “a younger and cheaper foreigner.”

Topping the list is what I heard from a PAP grassroots ex-banker, he could not get back into the workforce after walking the ground for two years. He said, “After walking the ground for two years I thought I’ll go back into the workforce. So I sent my resume to several headhunters and received a call from a Korean who was in his twenties, who was more interested in finding a good place to rent than helping me find a job.”

But our statistics tell a different story. Unemployment is low, we are told that it is hovering at about 2% and our Acting Minister for Manpower Tan Chaun Jin feels, in closed door meeting with me, that enough is being done to tackle the issue of employment or lack of it here in Singapore.

So, we’ve had a good year, economy wise in 2013 – our economy grew 3.7% last year. But costs have also gone up dramatically and the price of public housing does not seem to be abating at any time soon. 2013 has left some people better off, but the majority is still caught up in a middle class rut – where little is left after spending on housing, transport, food and children’s education.

With mounting cost pressures and increased cost of living, wage stagnation may become a major issue in 2014. Unfortunately, nominal increase in wages will not cut it for our middle class, which includes people living in four and five room HDB houses or condominiums.

I do expect the government to come up with a slew of measures to address these issues – they may range from programmes for SME growth, economic growth, wage supplement, healthcare subsidies to public housing.

While I am confident that we’ll have another good economic year in 2014 as a positive outcome of our government’s economic policies; unfortunately and my fear is that it will only manifest well as key economic indicator i.e. GDP numbers. However, the key question to ask is whether there’ll be equitable distribution of wealth – whether the wealth created year on year is going to trickle down to our people or whether it’ll end up in the cash account of Temasek or GIC, or worse to fund the ailing European economies or to fund the next smart city in China?

The solution to this problem, as apparent as it seems to the people and not for our learned bureaucrats, lies in our taxation regime. But, is the ruling party ready to implement a more progressive taxation system?

There are political trade-offs here; PAP needs to be less radical in the taxation and economic policies. They need to tax the rich a lot more. There may lose some political capital with the super-rich but they’ll gain more in the long run with a more stable society and an equitable distribution of wealth.

Politics is unpredictable, they say. It depends on the perception of how we see our leaders and their ability to govern. If 2013 was anything to go by, it is a marked by one electoral disaster, followed by the biggest protest since independence, to sinkholes, floods and a riot.

And on the Internet, the government and the FMI group were engaged in a bitter territorial dispute over who owns it and whether the MDA has the regulatory powers over it. This topic merits an article of its own…

With so many things that have gone awry and wrong last year, it makes the man on the street wonder if the PAP still has its mandate, whether it is from the heavens above or from us, the ordinary citizens.

As we turn a new page, we have an opportunity before us to write yet another chapter for Singapore. And I hope this year unlike the last will be a year that we can build a new, more vibrant, and a more open society that measures itself not in GDP numbers or unemployment rates but by looking at the weakest, poorest and meekest in our society. They are our weakest links and we cannot afford to let a segment of our society marginalized.

It is to this group that I lend my voice – it is the reason I founded The Independent Singapore – to tell the untold story.

With that note I wish my readers and from all of us from TISG, a Happy New Year, have a great 2014!

Sports Hub … and here is the rub

Uncategorized

The Independent

-

January 1, 2014

0

Ser Luck will not score the goals. You have to make the Hub something special, something unique by holding a mini-World Cup

By Michael Y.P. Ang

Before we get overly excited about the spanking new Sports Hub and what the mainstream media have been hyping as “a new era in Singapore sports” and Singapore coming “alive as a sports hub”, let us pause and ponder for a moment.

Does the Sports Hub possess anything special which the government could rely on to build a thriving Singaporean sports culture? Which country has ever successfully transformed itself into a sporting nation after it has built a collection of sports facilities within a small area?

Other than new and more comfortable seats, its centrepiece (the new National Stadium) represents no real improvement. Its 55,000 capacity is the same as the one built in the early 1970s, when Singapore’s population was much smaller.

This makes the authorities’ confidence in driving sports spectatorship, which is one target of the government’s Vision 2030 sports development plan, looks shaky at best.

One may say that the new stadium will have the world’s biggest dome roof. So what? Do we really expect this bit of trivia to have any significance in sports development?

Already, due to Singapore’s size, there are doubts about whether the water-sports centre at the 35-hectare Kallang Basin is equipped to host a 2-km rowing event, even if rowing is selected for the 2015 SEA Games. The Sports Hub website says “a 1km course will be accessible from Marina Bay”.

BEEN THERE, DONE THAT, BUT DID IT WORK?

By regularly staging marquee events such as the Women’s Tennis Association (WTA) Championships, to be held at the Singapore Indoor Stadium (SIS) for the next five years, the authorities are hoping that it will inspire inactive Singaporeans to participate in some form of sport.

The SIS hosted the Heineken Open, an Association of Tennis Professionals (ATP) Tour event, for four years in the late 1990s. Did that prompt Singaporeans to become active in sports?

Teo Ser Luck, Chairman of the Sporting Culture Committee, says that “the kicker must be sports that Singaporeans can connect with”. No, the “kicker” has to be much more than that. It must be capable of grabbing global attention.

Teo hopes that two events, the Fifa U-20 World Cup and Fifa Club World Cup which Singapore may get to host, will “pull Singaporeans in droves to the National Stadium”.

Malaysia hosted the U-20 event in 1997, but it received a rather poor response from Malaysians, whose football tastes are more similar to Singaporeans’ than any other nationality. The home team’s three matches at the 80,000-capacity Shah Alam Stadium drew crowds of 25,000, 10,000, and 25,000.

The Fifa club event features only one European team. If no English team is involved, most Singaporeans will likely choose to stay away.

ARE YOU SERIOUS?

If the authorities are serious about true sporting success, they must see to it that the Sports Hub stages an event that is original and with global appeal. Such an event can generate substantial revenue which could be used for national sports development, while driving Singapore’s sport tourism to unprecedented heights.

I propose that the Singapore Sports Council, Football Association of Singapore, and Singapore Tourism Board work together to make a pitch to Fifa for the creation of the Fifa World Champions League, exclusively for countries that have won the World Cup – Brazil, Italy, Germany, Argentina, Uruguay, France, Spain, and England.

This event will provide additional income (broadcast rights fees, sponsorships, etc) for Fifa, while boosting its public relations because it shows that Fifa is reaching out to the Third World of football – physically small and weak footballing nations with no realistic chance of hosting the World Cup.

Fifa’s international match calendar runs on a four-year cycle. There is always one year without a global or major continental event (World Cup, Confederations Cup, Olympics or European Championship). The next inactive year is 2015.

Even if Fifa buys the idea, will the eight global football giants be on board?

The proposed event will always be held one year after the World Cup, offering those players who had failed to win the Cup the previous year a quick opportunity to prove themselves, instead of having to wait four long years, while the eight teams also get to win more fans in a part of the world where they don’t usually play.

COMPETITION FORMAT

The tournament can be completed within 18 days in June, when players are free from playing for their clubs. Evenly divided into two groups, the eight teams will play 15 matches, including the semi-finals and final. Because the final group matches must be played simultaneously and Singapore has only one major stadium, two matches could be held in Malaysia.

For the other three years, Singapore’s sports officials could consider striking up a similar deal with Europe’s football governing body, Uefa, for a new tournament during European clubs’ pre-season, involving only teams that have won the Champions League (or European Cup).

If the authorities are willing to pursue this and able to pull it off, Singapore’s international profile will surely enjoy a mega boost, much more than that from the F1 race and Youth Olympiad combined.

Not only that, businesses that cater to tourists will be one big, happy bunch, while Singaporean sports fans (most of whom love football) will likely still be feeling giddy even after the football immortals have left our island.

1. If You’re Not Rich, It’s Your Own Fault

2. Mocking the Amount of Money Involved in Scandals

3. Dispensing Advice That Only Other Rich People Can Use

4. Saying That Money Trickles Down, Even if You Won’t Invest in Us

Three law professors in a recently released book have called upon the legislature to amend and give Singapore a modernised Penal Code for the 21st century

What is Staging?

1. Set the Dining Table

2. Track Lighting and Uplights

3. Move Furniture Away From the Walls, if You Can

4. Don’t Neglect the Front Door

5. Paint the Grouting in Toilets and Kitchens

6. Slap on a Uniform Paint Job

7. Don’t Make It Look Lived In

Does the HDB Loan Make Housing Affordable?

1. Peg Interest Rates to Household Income

2. Simply Lower HDB Rates in Prolonged Low Interest Environments

3. Offer a Low Interest Reno Loan Complement

Singapore News

Business

Singapore Politics