‘Please wake up’: Netizens mock idea that S$5K salary is enough to buy a condo in Singapore

SINGAPORE: An article examining whether a Singaporean earning S$5,000 a month can realistically purchase a condominium has sparked debate online, with many netizens dismissing the idea as unrealistic despite the calculations presented.

The article, published by Oh My Home, estimated that an individual earning around S$5,000 monthly with no existing debts could qualify for a housing loan of approximately S$576,000. Based on prevailing financing rules, this would translate into a maximum property budget of between S$750,000 and S$768,000.

However, the analysis also noted that prospective buyers would need about S$207,000 upfront before collecting the keys to the property. This amount includes the down payment, stamp duties and legal fees, with at least S$38,000 to S$59,000 required in cash rather than CPF savings.

While the article concluded that monthly mortgage repayments could be manageable for many buyers at this income level, it pointed out that accumulating the initial capital would likely be the biggest hurdle.

The figures quickly drew scepticism from Singaporeans, many of whom argued that the premise of buying a condo on such a salary were detached from the realities faced by ordinary households.

Several commenters reacted with disbelief, posting remarks such as, “You are joking!”, “Kidding or what?”, and “He is dreaming….. please wake up!” Others simply urged aspiring buyers to “Stop dreaming lah”.

A number of netizens joked that such a purchase would require extreme sacrifices. One quipped, “Unless you don’t eat every day,” while another added that buyers would have to survive on “bread every day and plain water”.

Others argued that a S$5,000 salary was more suited to purchasing public housing rather than private property. “A $5000 salary is not enough to buy a condo house. HDB house can buy,” one commenter wrote.

The discussion also prompted a wave of sarcastic responses suggesting that family wealth would be necessary to make the numbers work.

One commenter joked that the solution was simple: “Diligently save the $5000 monthly, only spend the 20k/mth ‘pocket money’ from rich dad. You probably can save enough for a down payment in 2-3yrs ti’ time. All you need is discipline…and a rich dad.”

Another remarked, “Can lah, an ultra-rich set of parents and grandparents will do the trick!” while others suggested that a “sugar daddy or mommy” could help bridge the affordability gap.

Some participants questioned whether buying a condominium should even be the goal.

One Singaporean said they were happier living in an HDB flat, arguing that public housing often offers more space and better value for families.

“I am enjoying a much better life living in Public Housing HDB. A bigger flat and more space with a better decent living,” the commenter wrote, adding that units smaller than 1,200 square feet would be difficult for a family of four to live in comfortably.

Others pointed out that the same budget could stretch much further outside Singapore. “In Johor, 900 dollars can already,” one commenter wrote, while another said such a property purchase might be possible “in Malaysia or Indonesia”.

Several commenters maintained that buying a condominium on a S$5,000 monthly salary would be unrealistic without additional income streams. “Of course can’t…unless you got other source of income, then different story…” one netizen wrote.

Another suggested that a more relevant question would be whether someone earning S$5,000 a month could comfortably afford a Build-To-Order flat instead.

Beyond the jokes and sarcasm, some commenters offered more detailed critiques of the article’s assumptions. One respondent argued that while the calculations were mathematically possible, they appeared to be based on highly favourable circumstances that may not reflect the experience of most Singaporean households.

The commenter noted that the analysis seemed to assume stable employment, predictable expenses and uninterrupted income growth, while overlooking risks such as retrenchment, job loss, medical emergencies, caregiving obligations and the costs associated with raising children.

They argued that qualifying for a loan on paper does not automatically mean a purchase is financially prudent.

Mortgage repayments, they said, are only one component of household finances. Families must also maintain emergency savings, insurance protection and sufficient reserves to cope with unexpected expenses.

As a result, the commenter contended that the article’s conclusions rested on a narrow set of ideal conditions that may only apply to a limited segment of buyers.

“Being able to buy a condominium and being able to afford one sustainably are two very different things,” the commenter wrote.